On Fri, 17 Oct 2003 07:36, Martin Pitt wrote: > > If you have an "optional" package depend on a package that is > > "important" or "required" then again it would be a bug for any other > > package to have a dependency that results in a circle leading back > > to your package. > > This confuses me. If a package can neither pre-depend on a package > that has a lower, an equal, nor a higher priority, then we wouldn't > need pre-dependencies at all. Could you convince an example?
I am saying that if you depend on more important packages, then the only way it breaks is if something else is broken. EG if postgresql pre-depends on adduser and adduser pre-depends on postgresql then there would be a problem, but this would be an obvious bug in adduser and nothing that you would have to be concerned with as maintainer of postgresql. Also if postgresql p-d on adduser, adduser p-d on libpam-pgsql (assuming there is such a package), and libpam-pgsql p-d on postgresql then there will be a problem. But again it would not be a problem with postgresql, so while working on postgresql you don't have to be concerned with that risk. -- http://www.coker.com.au/selinux/ My NSA Security Enhanced Linux packages http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/ Bonnie++ hard drive benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/postal/ Postal SMTP/POP benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/~russell/ My home page