George Danchev wrote: >> 2: If the list is passed to some package tool, I see no reason to >> introduce/depend on some another functionality by dpkg. > > The hard dependency of libapt-pkg-perl could be avoided by a run-time check in > the script itself, and the installation of that package is only suggested if > the relevant functionality is to be used. Does that sound sane enough? > > if ($frontend) { > eval { require AptPkg }; > if ( $@ ) { > die "-f requires libapt-pkg-perl package to be installed\n"; > } > } > For me personally that still sounds as an unnecessary middle-level layer as I "have" an example implementation without it. But am I not a dpkg developer and YMMV. -- Eugene V. Lyubimkin aka JackYF, JID: jackyf.devel(maildog)gmail.com C++/Perl developer, Debian Developer
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature