Bug#97755: PROPOSAL] eliminating task packages; new task system
[Sorry if I'm talking nonsense here; I've only recently started reading
debian-policy again, so I may be further out of touch than I think.]
On Thu, May 17, 2001 at 05:46:48PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > Rather than having task packages any more, individual packages that
> > belong to a task can have a Task: control file field that lists the
> > names of tasks they are a part of. This field can also be added to the
> > Packages file by way of an override, even if a package does not contain
> > it. Doing things this way has a lot of benefits that AJ has recently
> > enumerated.
> It also probably has some long term drawbacks: it doesn't generalise all
> that immediately to allowing "upgrading" tasks, nor "removing" tasks.
Since the task wouldn't actually be installed in any permanent sense
(there's no task package to install), upgrading a task would probably
just consist of selecting it again with tasksel. tasksel would scan
the available file and mark for installation anything which has the
appropriate value in its Task: line.
It's not really possible to "remove" a task at present. You can remove
its task package... or you could hunt down all the task package's
dependencies and remove them. Under the proposed setup, tasksel could
mark all the packages making up the task for removal.
Charles Briscoe-Smith Hacking Free Software for Alcove
PGP/GPG: 1024R/B35EE811 74 68 AB 2E 1C 60 22 94 B8 21 2D 01 DE 66 13 E2
I sign these contracts / that means I'm willing / to keep on doing bloody
awful evil things / [...] No! No! / This nightmare must come to an end!
-- Seymour, "Little Shop of Horrors", lyrics by Howard Ashman, apparently
referring to the ethics of signing non-disclosure agreements