Re: Recommends for metapackages
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256
Hi,
Le 11/07/12 14:36, Gergely Nagy a écrit :
> Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@debian.org> writes:
>
>> IMO, metapackages should "depend" on the absolutely required
>> stuff (and many times that will be the empty set), "recommend"
>> the rest, and maybe even "suggest" fringe packages. This
>> achieves maximum usability for more usecases, and malfunctions
>> only in the unsupported case of "no install recommends by
>> default" -- you should skip recommends always in a case-by-case
>> basis.
>
Of course, there could be a "network-manager-gui" virtual package so
that gnome-core can depend on "network-manager-gui |
network-manager-gnome".
By the way, I find it enlightening to realize that "gnome" only
recommends network-manager-gnome whereas gnome-core depends on it.
> That also achives maximum annoyance, because if I want the full
> platform, I'll have to go recommends/suggest hunting. (No, I'm
> *not* going to turn on install-recommends.)
You don't want to turn on install-recommends, but you are happy with
installing a loaded meta-package such as "gnome" or "kde-full"? I very
much don't see the rationale behind this. This is what policy has to
say about "Recommends":
"The Recommends field should list packages that would be found
together with this one in all but unusual installations."
>> OTOH, metapackages from hell (like gnome or kde-full) based on
>> Depends require me to select them, go to the "will install these"
>> screen, deselect the meta package, and go over the list manually
>> installing whatever isn't going to be useless/unwelcome for my
>> specific case. And I will never notice if the metapackage
>> changes its dependency tree later on.
>
> You could script all that, and keep your local list up-to-date
> with about ~10 minutes of work.
The annoyance of not being able to uninstall just one of many packages
pulled by a big meta-package does not affect only developers. A
reasonable solution should be found which works for our priority: our
users.
Regards, Thibaut.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/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=Bi/k
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: