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

Re: Query regarding circular dependency

On 18/03/14 21:45, Don Armstrong wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Mar 2014, Daniel Lintott wrote:
>> Following my recent work on bug #736820 [1], which required packaging a
>> number of new modules, I've now discovered it has created a circular
>> dependency!
>> libnet-frame-perl depends on libnet-frame-device-perl (this is to fix
>> the bug)
>> and
>> libnet-frame-device-perl depends on libnet-frame-perl.
>> Looking at bug again, would it be acceptable on libnet-frame-perl to
>> drop the dependency to a suggests?
> Because neither libnet-frame-device-perl nor libnet-frame-perl have
> postinsts and the dependency cycle is very short the restriction on
> circular dependencies isn't really important here.
> That said, it would be possible for libnet-frame-device-perl to
> Recommends: libnet-frame-perl, especially if you can include an
> informative error message in the modules in libnet-frame-device-perl
> which tell people to install libnet-frame-perl [and if anything which
> depends on libnet-frame-device-perl is fixed to depend on
> libnet-frame-perl instead.]

I have had more of a think about this... and believe that a recommends
would be appropriate.

Looking at libnet-frame-perl, it doesn't require
libnet-frame-device-perl to be present to be used, but it's probably
useful if it does, hence a recommends [1].

My other justification on this would be, the depends of a package are
what is needed for that package to function, not every package a
developer might want with it... please correct me if I'm wrong!




Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply to: