Re: Status of circulars dependencies in unstable
Raphael Hertzog <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> On Mon, 05 Sep 2011, Josselin Mouette wrote:
>> Le dimanche 04 septembre 2011 à 17:30 -0700, Russ Allbery a écrit :
>>> I would like to see someone sort out what to do about perl and
>>> perl-modules before Policy makes it a requirement.
>> Is there anything special about this case? It looks to me that the
>> perl-modules→perl dependency just needs to be downgraded.
> IIRC installing perl-modules without perl breaks a lot of stuff because
> the installed modules are not working without the arch-specific part in
> perl itself (and vice-versa).
> And those modules can be used because the "perl" executable is in
> perl-base and not in perl.
Yeah, perl-modules really does depend on perl, in that the package is
actively broken and will break other things, not just merely unusable,
without it. Note that perl-modules has a ton of Provides, and something
depending on one of those provided modules without depending on perl
itself is likely to break if only perl-modules gets installed.
The problem is that perl and perl-modules really are one package that was
split apart solely to get the (large) architecture-independent parts into
an arch: all package.
Russ Allbery (email@example.com) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>