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

Re: is it a bug to not depend on a library package needed for some binary?

2005/7/17, Goswin von Brederlow <brederlo@informatik.uni-tuebingen.de>:
> Karl Chen <quarl@cs.berkeley.edu> writes:
> > Suppose package P contains files /usr/bin/B1 and /usr/bin/B2.  B1
> > is the important program, and B2 is not as important.  Is it OK
> > for the declared package dependencies to not satisfy all the
> > run-time shared library dependencies of B2?  What if they are
> > listed in Suggests?
> >
> > I have found many such packages.
> Any examples?
> From my gut I would say thats a serious policy violation and if P
> can't depend on all libs it should be split into B1 and B2 packages
> and B1 suggest B2.
> If your examples are like B1 is a console program and B2 an X program
> and P doesn't want to pull in X for console users then splitting is
> the right thing to do. isdnutils would be example of having split due
> to this in the past.

Let say, hypothetically, the maintainer made a script called
/usr/bin/B2 which would check for the dependancies. If they're not
present error out with a message "please install program Y". If they
are present, exec the original.

Would this still be a policy violation?

Reply to: