Andreas Tille <andr...@an3as.eu> writes: >> It's a meta-package, that pulls in a platform. If I install it, I want >> the full platform, always. That's about it. If I install mono-complete, >> I want the whole bloody thing, always. > > I think the attempt to ensure something always is not reasonable because > if the admin decided to break the system in whatever way chances are low > that you can do this.
And if the admin broke his system, I stop caring. Neither Recommends, nor Depends will help there. > You also can not do this "always" if I as a local > admin do some fancy stuff with preferences to get the dependency > resolution from somewhere else or do some fancy tricks with equivs. So > your always argument is void for other ways to break my machine. Indeed so. But that, too, is outside of the scope. When I say "always", I meant it as "on my system, wearing my root hat". What other people do to their system, is none of my business. > You have intentionally broken your system as it was defined in policy > and you now try one way to fix your personal broken system on all other > systems which are not broken in this specific way. Erm, how have I broken my system? I did not. (Turning Install-Recommends off is definitely not breaking my system, FYI.) > I have not read the whole thread but it seems to me that you have > ignored the system of recommends. Alas, I did not, and I explained it elsewhere in this thread why and how Recommends would break expectations, and why they are inferior to Depends, as far as meta-packages are concerned. I also presented ways to improve the current situation, none of which involve Recommend, and neither would break any system, nor expectations, and as such, are superior to Recommends - at least when talking about meta packages. -- |8] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87ipdtthm2.fsf@algernon.balabit
