On Thu, 17 May 2007 20:48:57 +0200 "Steinar H. Gunderson" <sgunderson@bigfoot.com> wrote: > On Thu, May 17, 2007 at 07:43:09PM +0100, Neil Williams wrote: > > Most users don't need to use the packages given as Recommends or > > Suggests so the purpose, as I see it, is to help those who have unusual > > or extended needs for the functions provided by the package. > > You are at odds with Policy with regard to most users and Recommends here, Yes, I should have phrased that better - I was glossing over the difference between Recommends and Suggests. I've reviewed one or two of the packages and migrated some existing Recommends to Suggests, also migrated some current Suggest to an Enhances: in the other package (where that package is one of my own). (So that's 'pending'.) > The `Recommends' field should list packages that would be found > together with this one in all but unusual installations. That's then perfect for emdebian-tools recommending subversion. > In other words, most users _will_ need to use the packages given as > Recommends (which is why aptitude installs them by default). I didn't know that. Thanks for the tip, it could be a problem with an embedded version of aptitude - many package maintainers would consider a cross-build to be an unusual installation. ;-) Emdebian may need to tinker with the Recommends: of cross-built packages to retain a sane dependency tree. I'll have to make a note of that. I'm still not convinced that such relationships can be accurately summarised in a control line devoid of context. -- Neil Williams ============= http://www.data-freedom.org/ http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/ http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
Attachment:
pgprxiBtMYyYj.pgp
Description: PGP signature