George Danchev wrote: > Eugene V. Lyubimkin writes: >> No, it doesn't. Dpkg and any sane high-level package manager won't >> consider installing/upgrading/keeping some package (meta or not) without >> all Depends installed. > > I agree. That flies directly in the face of Policy definition of Depends:
Come on people, Policy can be changed :) > <cite> > This declares an absolute dependency. A package will not be configured > unless all of the packages listed in its Depends field have been correctly > configured. </cite> > > Degrading such a base and well established feature looks like a criminal > act, at best ;-) What if we added "apart from metapackages, identified by Meta-Package: yes"? I'm not yet seeing any strong argument against this DEP, but I'm clearly biased ;) David -- . ''`. Debian developer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 ----|---- http://snipr.com/qa_page `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org