>I would make a general point about circular dependencies. If a) really >depends on b), and b) really depends on a), then they can only be installed >together, right? In which case, I see little value in having them as >separate packages.
What about the situation where A depends on the virtual package B which is provided by both C and D, while C and D depend on A. An example of this was the JDK packages which used to (not sure if they still do) have packages for shared and static motif linking along with a base package. The base package depended on the AWT package which came in static or shared versions, while AWT depended on the base package. This was logical and worked OK once you knew what to do. --- I'm an independant computer consultant. I prefer to do Linux administration and programming. OS/2 programming is also fun, and I do sometimes do NT programming. I mainly do C++ programming, but would like to get into Java. This should satisfy the curiosity of those on SERVER-LINUX. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
