[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Uninstallable packages in woody

On Fri, May 31, 2002 at 10:29:11PM -0700, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> > Previously Santiago Vila wrote:
> > > That's not the issue. The issue is why the hell don't we fix the damn
> > > bad dependencies and conflicts once and forever.

Because people don't stop uploading packages when you've fixed the
bugs, nor do they stop changing the conflicts or adding new depends or
rearranging priorities and so on.

> I complained about it at the beginning of woody, and I was told "oh,
> that's not a goal for woody".  Let's make it a goal for the next
> release?

That's not the way these things work. If you want it fixed, first you
need to make sure you understand the problem, then you need to make sure
you've worked out exactly what changes need to be made in a way that's
obviously correct at first glance, and completely justifiable at second
glance, and then you need to keep this information up to date pretty
much in perpetuity.

The first part of this has been done for priorities & conflicts a few
times, and the second and third parts generally haven't. If you really
want to see it fixed, that's what *you* will have to do.

aj, wondering if this'll be yet another "but it's ftpmaster's job! why
    don't they just do it! or give me full access to do it! i know best,
    and they're all standing in the way! it's not fair!" thread, or if
    someone'll take the hint and do something productive instead

Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.

     ``BAM! Science triumphs again!'' 
                    -- http://www.angryflower.com/vegeta.gif

Attachment: pgp69C2OaRK2S.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: