Re: alternative dependency ordering - with respect of packages in main
On September 22, 2011 12:23:00 PM Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> On 11-09-22 at 08:19am, Bruce Sass wrote:
> > On September 22, 2011 02:50:25 AM Gerfried Fuchs wrote:
> > > * Bruce Sass <email@example.com> [2011-09-21 23:18:54 CEST]:
> > > > Debian already favours Main packages by default
> > >
> > > Not if the alternative dependency chain has a non-free package
> > >
> > > first. I know what you mean with that non-free isn't enabled by
> > > default, but the way the dependency chain is written still favours
> > > non-free packages by default, when available -- which is the thing
> > > you like to emphasis on, but the favour is still the other way
> > > round.
> > I disagree. The only way a non-free package is going to be
> > automatically selected is if the sysadmin has added non-Main lines to
> > sources.list, and the Maintainer has placed a non-Main package before
> > one from Main in the dependency statement--that's two explicit actions
> > that need to be taken, compared to zero if non-Main stuff isn't
> > wanted.
> Another way a non-free package gets automatically selected is if some
> package which conflicts with the free alternative, when the package
> containing non-free alternative (no matter the order) is installed.
Wouldn't that be a technical issue, and not something which could be fixed by
adjusting the dependency statements or how the tools parse them?