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

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

Steve Langasek wrote:

> Those are exactly the correct semantics.  It makes no sense to remove the
> depends of a metapackage *and leave the metapackage installed* - what
> purpose would that serve?

Being able to

# apt-get --purge remove wicd

(thus removing any dependency/recommends/anything), without caring for the 
removed parts singularly?

However, seems like on IRC we reached kind of a consensus on the fact that 
metapackages should use Recommends instead of Depends. I plan to do a mass-
bug filing on this issue sooner or later, just need some time to do it :)

I might change this DEP to propose a new field, halfway betwen Recommends 
and Depends (as weasel suggested, Weak-Depends), but haven't carefully 
thought at it yet.


 . ''`.   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: