Re: Recommends for metapackages
On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 11:06:40AM +0200, Gergely Nagy wrote:
> > Right. So you're arguing that all the packages should be listed as
> > Depends: to make *your* life easier, when you're doing something
> > different from what's recommended. Thanks for showing how much weight
> > we should attach to your argument.
Even if there seems to be no point in the discussion any more because
the arguing is void - I'll try some hint.
> It's a meta-package, that pulls in a platform. If I install it, I want
> the full platform, always. That's about it. If I install mono-complete,
> I want the whole bloody thing, always.
I think the attempt to ensure something always is not reasonable because
if the admin decided to break the system in whatever way chances are low
that you can do this. You also can not do this "always" if I as a local
admin do some fancy stuff with preferences to get the dependency
resolution from somewhere else or do some fancy tricks with equivs. So
your always argument is void for other ways to break my machine.
You have intentionally broken your system as it was defined in policy
and you now try one way to fix your personal broken system on all other
systems which are not broken in this specific way.
I have not read the whole thread but it seems to me that you have
ignored the system of recommends.