Re: Getting rid of circular dependencies
On Fri, 2005-06-24 at 22:59 +0200, Olaf van der Spek wrote:
> I'd argue for exactly that.
> What functionality would you say a data package provides?
> It's the other package that provides the functionality, not the data
> package. The data package shouldn't even have to know about the other
If you want to play word games and not apply common sense, then I would
say that foo-data package has functionality to provide data to foo and
so it's broken without foo package. You must realize that 90% of these
packages are games and only reason for foo + foo-data is to not split
out arch independent data out of foo package so it doesn't get
replicated for each arch.
One thing is very clear:
1. this is (a sort of) abuse of Depends field
2. we need reverse Suggest/Recommends field, ie. something like
(well, same can be applied to -doc, -common, etc.)
Truth is that deborphan is very nice tool to do this...
Ondrej Sury <firstname.lastname@example.org>