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

Bug#758234: another nasty fallout of this requirement



On Sat, 2016-12-03 at 06:33 +0100, Adam Borowski wrote:
> And to actually fix the issues, instead of merely dropping the
> mention and
> thus making the dependencies last forever because of inertia, I urge
> you to
> go all the way from "priority of rdepends MUST be raised" all the way
> to
> "priority of rdepends MUST NOT be raised, every package is to be
> evaluated
> only based on what it directly brings to the user (elevation possibly
> _moved_ to a metapackage/etc but never copied the other way)" (maybe
> just a
> SHOULD NOT for a transitional period).

I think this should be a "SHOULD NOT":

The main consumer of the priority information is the installer
(debootstrap) which has only a very limited dependency resolver.  It
might be necessary to raise the priority of dependencies to make sure
it does the right thing (I don't think we need this currently, but we
should keep the option open in case it turns out we need it).

Ansgar


Reply to: