Re: Dependencies of metapackages
>>>>> Wolodja Wentland <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> is there a specific reason why metapackages depend rather then
> recommend packages they are meant to pull in?
> The rationale behind this question is  that we see a plethora of
> users in #debian who ask questions like: "Why did apt remove all my
> and we have to explain to them that it is because they decided to
> remove one of (typically) gnome's dependencies, which caused the
> metapackage to be removed as well. The solution is then to either
> mark all other dependencies as manually installed, install a smaller
> metapackage or a combination of those.
Since turning these dependencies into Recommends: is apparently
infeasible, it may be useful to amend APT to automatically mark
the metapackage's dependencies as manually installed if the
metapackage itself is so marked.
Or do I miss something obvious with this approach?
(Sorry, I'm not familiar with the subject. Beyond knowing to
avoid metapackages at all costs, i. e.)
FSF associate member #7257 Coming soon: Software Freedom Day
http://mail.sf-day.org/lists/listinfo/ planning-ru (ru), sfd-discuss (en)