Re: Getting rid of circular dependencies, stage 5
Loïc Minier writes ("Re: Getting rid of circular dependencies, stage 5"):
> I fail to see how the circular depends between tasksel and tasksel-data
> would cause any bug though. I agree it's best to fix circular deps in
> general, but it's not necessarily required each time.
You persist in using the word `fix'. But that's not correct. There
is NOTHING WRONG with circular dependencies per se.
Of course particular instances of circular dependencies might be
problematic. I would try to avoid it other than in closely coupled
sets of packages, and it is best of one of the packages in the cycle
is per data without a postinst.
There have also been bugs in dpkg's handling of cycles involving
virtual packages but these are fixed now I think.