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

Re: Reasons for recommends and suggests



Am Freitag 18 Mai 2007 01:56 schrieb Don Armstrong:
> The recommends should be a set such that you'd want to install them,
> unless you know specifically why you don't. [In the majority of cases
> that I've personally run into, this means "unusual" setups like a
> separate database server, stripped installs, etc.]
>
> Moreover, the information necessary to explain what packages that are
> Recommends: or Suggests: actually do and the additional features they
> require is not something that can be easily jammed into the
> Description without making the description uselessly long. The
> Description should give you enough information to figure out whether
> or not you want to install a package, not telling you how to use the
> package or the descriptions of other packages that the package
> Recommends: or Suggests:. That kind of documentation really belongs in
> README.Debian or other documentation included with the package.

The description should not explain what the other package is but _what_ it 
does to the selected package.
Example: ucf recommends debconf-utils. The description of debconf-utils tells 
me nothing about what it actually does (really could be more verbose) and I 
cannot draw the connection line to ucf. The question that arises is: "Do I 
also need it if I am not a debconf developer?".
I would say no based on the description of debconf-utils just because I have 
not the faintest idea what ucf does with those. And no, I do not want to read 
all manpages and README.Debian files for packages that maybe are 4th-level 
dependencies of a selected package (although I look at all of them in 
aptitude).

HS

Attachment: pgp7_QnY4SfBu.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: