Re: Getting rid of circular dependencies, stage 5
Ian Jackson <email@example.com> writes:
> Josselin Mouette writes ("Re: Getting rid of circular dependencies, stage 5"):
>> Le lundi 24 juillet 2006 à 17:15 +0100, Ian Jackson a écrit :
>> > 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.
>> This is entirely wrong. There have several been RC bugs (some that break
>> the buildds) caused by circular dependencies on closely coupled sets of
> I said `particular instances of circular dependencies might be
> problematic'. Obviously circular dependencies might be wrong or
> broken. Non-circular dependencies might be wrong or broken too.
> Package maintainers often put mad stuff in control files.
So you seem to be all for cleaning out that mad stuff, right?
Lets all get on with the list initialiy posted and fix those circular
depends or note why they are required.