On Sun, Jun 08, 2014 at 11:22:24PM -0700, Manoj Srivastava wrote: Hi, > Perhaps a compromise might be to move the dependency to > recommends, and make a note in the man page and coumentation about the > need for xmlto in order build all the documentation?
I've researching a bit more, and I've found that the "Recommends: dblatex | fop"
part of the xmlto dependencies is what causes the behaviour (fop depends on Java
and dblatex, well, on LaTeX and so). So I guess there is not much difference
between having a Depends: or a Recommends: to xmlto.
I already have aptitude::Ignore-Recommends-Important to true in the aptitude
config file, but clearly it's not working as intended, because if I use a
explicit --without-recommends:
# aptitude upgrade --without-recommends
Resolving dependencies...
The following NEW packages will be installed:
docbook-xsl{a} libxml2-utils{a} xmlto{a} xsltproc{a}
The following packages will be upgraded:
kernel-package
The following packages are RECOMMENDED but will NOT be installed:
dblatex docbook-utils fop kernel-common
Now it's ignoring fop and dblatex and their dependencies. And also does the
manual upgrade:
# aptitude install kernel-package --without-recommends
The following NEW packages will be installed:
docbook-xsl{a} libxml2-utils{a} xmlto{a} xsltproc{a}
The following packages will be upgraded:
kernel-package
The following packages are RECOMMENDED but will NOT be installed:
dblatex docbook-utils fop kernel-common
Ok, sorry for the inconvenience, you can close the bug. I going to look if this
behaviour is what aptitude is suppose to do, or it's a bug.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
