Re: Recommends for metapackages

Andrei POPESCU writes: > On Jo, 12 iul 12, 12:10:29, Gergely Nagy wrote: >> >> Erm, how have I broken my system? I did not. (Turning Install-Recommends >> off is definitely not breaking my system, FYI.) > > It means you are running with a non-default configuration and you should > be aware of t

Re: Recommends for metapackages

Andrei POPESCU writes: > On Jo, 12 iul 12, 15:46:05, Gergely Nagy wrote: >> >> X) Downgrade stuff to recommends >> >> >> I do not consider this a solution, for reasons explained elsewhere, >> where my main concern is that it breaks the assumption that installing

Re: Recommends for metapackages

Tollef Fog Heen writes: > ]] Gergely Nagy > >> Instead of fighting for Recommends, which would break your system in >> various interesting ways later on[1], there's a third solution: noone >> stops anyone from uploading a gnome-minimal package, which depends on >> gnome-session and a few selecte

Re: Recommends for metapackages

Wouter Verhelst writes: > On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 04:18:17PM +0200, Gergely Nagy wrote: >> "Eugene V. Lyubimkin" writes: >> >> > On 2012-07-10 15:32, Josselin Mouette wrote: >> >> Le mardi 10 juillet 2012 à 17:38 +0900, Miles Bader a écrit : >> >> > What's wrong with Recommends: in that case?

Re: Recommends for metapackages

]] Gergely Nagy > Instead of fighting for Recommends, which would break your system in > various interesting ways later on[1], there's a third solution: noone > stops anyone from uploading a gnome-minimal package, which depends on > gnome-session and a few selected other parts, without n-m. I wo

Re: Bug#681404: ITP: garmin-plugin -- browser plugin for communication with the Garmin Connect service

]] Ralf Treinen > This browser plugin has the same methods and properties as the official > Garmin Communicator Plugin (http://www8.garmin.com/products/communicator/). > It can be used to transfer GPX files (Geocache Descriptions) to your garmin > device using the official Garmin Javascript

Re: Recommends for metapackages

On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 04:18:17PM +0200, Gergely Nagy wrote: > "Eugene V. Lyubimkin" writes: > > > On 2012-07-10 15:32, Josselin Mouette wrote: > >> Le mardi 10 juillet 2012 à 17:38 +0900, Miles Bader a écrit : > >> > What's wrong with Recommends: in that case? It seems to perfectly > >> > mat

Bug#681418: debugfs is a big security hole

Package: src:linux Version: 3.2.21-3 Severity: important Tags: security As discussed here . I certainly consider mounting of debugfs to be significant security liability. I'm not at all happy that people use

Work-needing packages report for Jul 13, 2012

The following is a listing of packages for which help has been requested through the WNPP (Work-Needing and Prospective Packages) system in the last week. Total number of orphaned packages: 461 (new: 7) Total number of packages offered up for adoption: 146 (new: 0) Total number of packages request

Bug#681404: ITP: garmin-plugin -- browser plugin for communication with the Garmin Connect service

Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Ralf Treinen * Package name: garmin-plugin Version : 0.3.12-1 Upstream Author : Andreas Diesner * URL : http://www.andreas-diesner.de/garminplugin/ * License : GPL-3 Programming Lang: C++ Description : browser pl

Re: Recommends for metapackages

On Jo, 12 iul 12, 12:10:29, Gergely Nagy wrote: > > Erm, how have I broken my system? I did not. (Turning Install-Recommends > off is definitely not breaking my system, FYI.) It means you are running with a non-default configuration and you should be aware of the side-effects. The attitude that

Re: Recommends for metapackages

On Jo, 12 iul 12, 17:44:52, Gergely Nagy wrote: > > > Then some time later during upgrade it'll upgrade all packages > > but will not install N-M; at the same time it'll install > > new package that was added to Recommends in that new version. > > As far as I remember, it will not install new rec

Re: RFC: Why are so many debian packages outdated?

Adding debian-devel to the recipients. I think the question belongs there. On Thu, 2012-07-12 at 21:39 +, Bart Martens wrote: > On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 11:25:47PM +0200, Svante Signell wrote: > > On Fri, 2012-07-13 at 00:20 +0300, Timo Juhani Lindfors wrote: > > > Svante Signell writes: > > >

Re: Recommends for metapackages

On Jo, 12 iul 12, 15:46:05, Gergely Nagy wrote: > > X) Downgrade stuff to recommends > > > I do not consider this a solution, for reasons explained elsewhere, > where my main concern is that it breaks the assumption that installing a > platform (in this case, gnom

Re: RFC: Why are so many debian packages outdated?

On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 3:06 PM, Svante Signell wrote: > Now when Wheezy is about to be released I would like to raise an issue. > How come that there are still so many outdated packages becoming part > of Wheezy. Some package maintainers are very responsive in upgrading to > new upstream releases

Re: RFC: Why are so many debian packages outdated?

On Fri, 2012-07-13 at 00:20 +0300, Timo Juhani Lindfors wrote: > Svante Signell writes: > > NMUs should be made/allowed/encouraged? I know all packaging is made by > > volunteers at their spare time, but anyway. Debian is one of the best > > distributions, what about raising the bar a little highe

Re: RFC: Why are so many debian packages outdated?

Svante Signell writes: > NMUs should be made/allowed/encouraged? I know all packaging is made by > volunteers at their spare time, but anyway. Debian is one of the best > distributions, what about raising the bar a little higher? The only way you can really improve the situation is to help with t

RFC: Why are so many debian packages outdated?

Hello, Now when Wheezy is about to be released I would like to raise an issue. How come that there are still so many outdated packages becoming part of Wheezy. Some package maintainers are very responsive in upgrading to new upstream releases, others are having packages several years old. Somethi

Re: Recommends for metapackages

On Thu, 2012-07-12 at 05:42 +0200, Adam Borowski wrote: > On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 09:32:19PM -0600, Philipp Kern wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 07:21:00PM +0100, Noel David Torres Taño wrote: > > > Installing N-M breaks unrelated software. > > > > No. At most it breaks *related* software. > >

Re: Recommends for metapackages

FTR: Please don't CC me on list mail. I'm tired of setting M-F-T. Tomasz Rybak writes: > Dnia 2012-07-12, czw o godzinie 15:46 +0200, Gergely Nagy pisze: >> Tomasz Rybak writes: >> >> > At first I thought it was a joke. But no, you really suggest that >> > everyone who wants to have up-to-date

Re: Recommends for metapackages

Dnia 2012-07-12, czw o godzinie 15:46 +0200, Gergely Nagy pisze: > Tomasz Rybak writes: > > > At first I thought it was a joke. But no, you really suggest that > > everyone who wants to have up-to-date desktop environment > > but without few packages (e.g. N-M or GDM) needs to create own package,

Re: Recommends for metapackages

Tomasz Rybak writes: > At first I thought it was a joke. But no, you really suggest that > everyone who wants to have up-to-date desktop environment > but without few packages (e.g. N-M or GDM) needs to create own package, > own local repository, and looks into it every time there is upgrade > to

Re: Recommends for metapackages

Dnia 2012-07-12, czw o godzinie 10:39 +0200, Gergely Nagy pisze: > Noel David Torres Taño writes: > > >> Yet, we try to not diverge much from upstream, and maintain a good > >> relationship with them. If they consider it core, so can we. Those who > >> want to hand-pick parts of a meta package, c

Re: Recommends for metapackages

On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 11:25:05PM +, Sune Vuorela wrote: > for the 1-2% of people who has weird needs. It's this proportion which I think is not consistent, nor agreed, amongst all developers. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe

Re: Recommends for metapackages

Thibaut Paumard writes: > Le 12/07/12 11:06, Gergely Nagy a écrit : >> Lets consider another case! Suppose I have Install-Recommends turned on, >> and install a theoretical meta package, that has half of its stuff in >> recommends, because they're not strictly necessary, but merely enhance >> the

Re: Recommends for metapackages

Andreas Tille 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 th

Re: Recommends for metapackages

Hi, Le 12/07/12 11:06, Gergely Nagy a écrit : > Lets consider another case! Suppose I have Install-Recommends turned on, > and install a theoretical meta package, that has half of its stuff in > recommends, because they're not strictly necessary, but merely enhance > the system. Lets suppose one o

Re: Recommends for metapackages

On 12-07-12 at 11:26am, Abou Al Montacir wrote: > On Thu, 2012-07-12 at 11:09 +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > > > On 12-07-12 at 10:28am, Abou Al Montacir wrote: > > > I'm maintaining a package which upstream delivers as all in one > > > (600MB) and refuses to support splitting. I've split it in

Re: Recommends for metapackages

On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 11:06:40AM +0200, Gergely Nagy wrote: > > Right. So you're arguing that all the packages should be listed as > > Depends: to make *your* life easier, when you're doing something > > different from what's recommended. Thanks for showing how much weight > > we should attach to

Re: Recommends for metapackages

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Le 12/07/12 11:09, Jonas Smedegaard a écrit : > As with any package available in Debian: Just don't install it if > you do not like what the package does! Hi, There is a major difference between the gnome-core metapackages and any other (meta) packag

Re: Recommends for metapackages

Abou Al Montacir writes: >> As with any package available in Debian: Just don't install it if you do >> not like what the package does! >> >> It really is that simple! > > I think that we really do not have the same understanding of > metapackage. You clearly want them strict and non flexible,

Re: Recommends for metapackages

Andrei POPESCU writes: > On Mi, 11 iul 12, 14:41:50, Gergely Nagy wrote: >> Andrei POPESCU writes: >> > >> > Depending on how you do the package selection on your next installation >> > you might end up with rsyslog, but without logrotate[1]. >> >> I don't see how that would break anything. lo

Re: Recommends for metapackages

On Thu, 2012-07-12 at 11:09 +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > On 12-07-12 at 10:28am, Abou Al Montacir wrote: > > I'm maintaining a package which upstream delivers as all in one > > (600MB) and refuses to support splitting. I've split it into 22 > > packages because I know and got requests from u

Re: Recommends for metapackages

Steve McIntyre writes: > Gergely wrote: >>Henrique de Moraes Holschuh writes: >> >>> IMO, metapackages should "depend" on the absolutely required stuff (and many >>> times that will be the empty set), "recommend" the rest, and maybe even >>> "suggest" fringe packages. This achieves maximum usab

Re: Recommends for metapackages

"Eugene V. Lyubimkin" writes: > On 2012-07-11 14:33, Gergely Nagy wrote: >> "Eugene V. Lyubimkin" writes: >> >> > Moreover, despite me understanding the picture, I still >> > has no clean, safe and documented way to do what I'd want in case the >> > package maintainer chosed Depends. >> >> You

Re: Recommends for metapackages

On 12-07-12 at 10:28am, Abou Al Montacir wrote: > I'm maintaining a package which upstream delivers as all in one > (600MB) and refuses to support splitting. I've split it into 22 > packages because I know and got requests from users who want to have > it in machines with small disks and/or low

Re: Recommends for metapackages

Noel David Torres Taño writes: >> Yet, we try to not diverge much from upstream, and maintain a good >> relationship with them. If they consider it core, so can we. Those who >> want to hand-pick parts of a meta package, can do so, we do not forbid. > > If we want to be user friendly, it is not a

Re: Recommends for metapackages

On Wed, 2012-07-11 at 23:57 +0200, Cyril Brulebois wrote: > Noel David Torres Taño (11/07/2012): > > > Your view is irrelevant here: GNOME project considers it essential. > > > > Gnome view is the one irrelevant. This is Debian GNU/Linux, not Gnome > > GNU/Linux. We need to care for our users (bo

Bug#681298: ITP: font-kalapi -- Kalapi Gujarati Unicode font

Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Debian-IN Team * Package name: font-kalapi Version : 0.1 Upstream Author : GujaratiLexicon Team * URL : https://github.com/gujaratilexicon/font-kalapi * License : OFL-1.1 Programming Lang: N/A Description : Kalap

Re: Recommends for metapackages

On 2012-07-12 09:23, Josselin Mouette wrote: > By the same view, totem improves GNOME, but it is not needed at all. Correct. But it does not conflict with kaffeine, mplayer, vlc, xine, ... > Gcalctool improves GNOME, but it is not needed at all. Correct. But it does not conflict with bc, kcalc,

Re: Recommends for metapackages

Le mercredi 11 juillet 2012 à 19:17 +0100, Noel David Torres Taño a écrit : > So a meta-package is "just" a way of installing things together, and a > lot more. But from those things, only dependencies should be Depends, > and software that improves the collection should be Recommends. In > this pa