On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 11:45:03AM +0200, Evgeni Golov wrote:
> clone 529066 -1
> reassign 529066 abuse-lib
> reassign -1 abuse-frabs
> retitle 529066 abuse-lib should not depend on abuse (circular dependency)
> retitle -1 abuse-frabs should not depend on abuse (circular dependency)
> thanks
>
> Hi Bill,
>
> thanks for the report.
>
> > There is a circular dependency between abuse, abuse-frabs and abuse-lib:
> >
> > abuse :Depends: abuse-frabs, abuse-lib (>= 2.00-11)
> > abuse-frabs :Depends: abuse (>= 1:0.7.0-1)
> > abuse-lib :Depends: abuse (>= 1:0.7.0-1)
>
> abuse-{lib,frabs} definetelly do not need a depends on abuse, as these are
> just data sets for abuse. However it's not really usefull to install them
> without having abuse installed, so I wonder if making a Recommends out of
> Depends would be a sufficient solution for this problem? Or will apt still
> do evil things when recommends are auto-installed? It won't, as far I can
> see, but I'd like to have another opinion on this.
Well, I do not think Recommends will break anything since dpkg handle them
differently from Depends, but since apt-get now has the autoremove feature,
I do not quite see the point of such Recommends. Noone is going to do
"apt-get install abuse-lib" and expect that abuse will be installed.
Cheers,
--
Bill. <ballo...@debian.org>
Imagine a large red swirl here.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
