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

loosing dependencies: Depends: on logrotate

	Since I've already started this thread, I'm going to ask for
	opinions on the one more issue with the current (Etch, at least)
	dependencies in Debian to bother me.

	Is `logrotate' really necessary for those 46 packages or so in
	Etch to include it in their `Depends:'?

	Debian Policy reads:

--cut: www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-relationships.html--
    The Depends field should be used if the depended-on package is
    required for the depending package to provide a significant amount
    of functionality.

    The Depends field should also be used if the postinst, prerm or
    postrm scripts require the package to be present in order to
    run.  Note, however, that the postrm cannot rely on any
    non-essential packages to be present during the purge phase.
--cut: www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-relationships.html--

	My opinion is that since `logrotate' is not required neither for
	the maintainer scripts in order to run, nor ``for the depending
	package to provide a significant amount of functionality'', this
	dependency should be either relaxed (to `Recommends:' or
	`Suggests:') or discarded completely.

	(And there're packages which provide a `logrotate.d/' file, but
	don't list `logrotate' as a dependency.  Among these are `dpkg'
	and `apache2.2-common'.)

	I've already discussed on this matter [1].  The reasons for
	having such a dependency stated to me were, AIUT, as follows:

	* ``packages should not facilitate users to shoot themselves in
	  the foot by filling up the logging partition'';

	  yet there're a plenty of ways to do it whether `logrotate' is
	  installed or not; I expect for the software to grant me
	  freedom, not to revoke it in order to save me from but the
	  very dumb mistakes;

	* since `logrotate' is `Priority: important', lightweight enough
	  and it ``is the standard log rotation mechanism in Debian
	  (including documentation in Debian policy)'', it would be
	  there anyway, whether the dependency would be in place or not;

	  but Debian Policy, AIUI, only mandates that the Debian
	  packages must support `logrotate', not that the Debian users
	  must actually use it! and isn't the absense of `logrotate' in
	  the system a clear sign of that the user knows what he or
	  she's doing?

[1] http://bugs.debian.org/422968

Reply to: