[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Bug#687001: ITP: optional-dev -- fake (empty) dev package

On Sat, Sep 08, 2012 at 10:01:17PM +1000, Dmitry Smirnov wrote:
> On Sat, 8 Sep 2012 19:37:33 Holger Levsen wrote:
> > "optional depends" - what?? Thats self contradictory. If a depends it's
> > really optional, it's not a depends, thus that package is buggy and should
> > not be fixed by introducing a nonsense package, but by removing this
> > depends.
> Not at all, it may appears "self contradictory" only because debian/control 
> "language" doesn't have a right term for it. Or perhaps my wording is not 
> perfect. If you got the idea, can you suggest a better word?
> Imagine a software that builds without a certain -dev package. When present 
> this package may be used to activate an additional (optional) feature.

Debian users depend on the package being built in a consistent way.  For
example, some packages are built with Kerberos support.  While this is
generally optional for most packages, I'd be very upset if, say, the
Debian openssh-server package suddenly lost support for Kerberos because
the maintainer or someone doing an NMU didn't have the appropriate -dev
package installed, since it would mean that package would suddenly fail
to work in a major way for me.  Your proposed solution would remove an
important safety check.

brian m. carlson / brian with sandals: Houston, Texas, US
+1 832 623 2791 | http://www.crustytoothpaste.net/~bmc | My opinion only
OpenPGP: RSA v4 4096b: 88AC E9B2 9196 305B A994 7552 F1BA 225C 0223 B187

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: