"Ian Jackson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bill Allombert writes ("Getting rid of circular dependencies, stage 5"):
Here the list of packages involved in circular dependencies listed by
maintainers.
Didn't we already have the conversation where we explained that there
is nothing necessarily wrong with a circular dependency ?
Well, strictly speaking all circular dependencies could be considered a
policy violation because they
depend on dpkg not working as policy states it does.
They are also a pain to any person who is manually feeding packages to dpkg
one at a time.
There seems to be no reason why that should not be able to work, but
circular dependencies will
always break that. There are other issues with them as well. If there is a
circular dependency your package
cannot rely on the fact that its dependecies are indeed installed and
configured. That is not
good.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
