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