Re: Getting rid of circular dependencies, stage 5
On Mon, Jul 24, 2006 at 06:32:54PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> Steve Greenland wrote:
> > This really seems like something that while they may, very occasionally,
> > be required, are mostly unnecessary and often misused.
>
> Rather, I'd characterise it as a feature that is necessary for any
> general-purpose depencency-based system to be complete[1], which is
> totally safe and does not adversely affect any aspect of the system
> if some simple rules are followed, and which, if used incorrectly, is
> still orders of magnitude safer than other dpkg features, such as its
> support for setuid files, or its support for postinst scripts that run
> arbitrary code at install time.
Well, if foo depends on foo-data, and foo-data depends on foo, I find
it really hard to see the point of splitting the two into distinctive
packages...
Regards: David Weinehall
--
/) David Weinehall <tao@debian.org> /) Rime on my window (\
// ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ // Diamond-white roses of fire //
\) http://www.acc.umu.se/~tao/ (/ Beautiful hoar-frost (/
Reply to: