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

Re: [RFC] DEP-6: Meta-Package debian/control field

George Danchev wrote:

> Eugene V. Lyubimkin writes:
>> No, it doesn't. Dpkg and any sane high-level package manager won't
>> consider installing/upgrading/keeping some package (meta or not) without
>> all Depends installed.
> I agree. That flies directly in the face of Policy definition of Depends:

Come on people, Policy can be changed :)

> <cite>
> This declares an absolute dependency. A package will not be configured
> unless all of the packages listed in its Depends field have been correctly
> configured. </cite>
> Degrading such a base and well established feature looks like a criminal
> act, at best ;-)

What if we added "apart from metapackages, identified by Meta-Package: yes"? 

I'm not yet seeing any strong argument against this DEP, but I'm clearly 
biased ;)


 . ''`.   Debian developer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino
 : :'  : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/
 `. `'`  GPG: 1392B174 ----|---- http://snipr.com/qa_page
   `-   2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174

Reply to: