On 2011-01-25 09:08 +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Jan 2011, Julien Cristau wrote:
>> > In other words, how about something like this patch?
>>
>> I don't think that's a good idea at this point. A year ago, maybe.
>>
>> One issue Sven mentioned on irc is that an unknown number of packages
>> would start shipping /usr/share/info/dir.gz on rebuild if we were to do
>> this.
>
> What about a Recommends instead of a Depends?
>
> buildd do not install Recommends AFAIK so it would not introduce breakages
> on bin-nmu.
>
> And it would give the proper hint to apt-get which is that he's supposed
> to install install-info on upgrade.
There's a little problem with that, install-info conflicts with Lenny's
texinfo version, so if that is installed¹ apt-get has to do one of the
following:
1) ignore the recommends
2) upgrade texinfo along dpkg
3) remove texinfo and its reverse dependencies
Tests are necessary to ensure that apt does 1) or 2) and not 3),
possibly wiping out a texlive-full installation.
Cheers,
Sven
¹ Which is the case on 5 out of 6 Debian installations, according to
popcon
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
