-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On Fri, 24 Oct 1997, Ian Jackson wrote:
> As far as I am concerned there is only one remaining issue to be > settled with regard to this field: the list of packages upon which > dependencies do not need to be listed. I propose that this list be: > packages which have `Priority: Standard' or better [...] This is a good start. However, I think it is too large. "Standard or better" includes packages like bison, flex, autoconf or automake. For example, if a package needs bison to be built, I would like to know it. Imagine that a severe bug is discovered in bison and we want to recompile all packages using bison in the building process. If we keep bison out of the list, we'll know which packages are using it by looking at the Source-Depends: field. If the list includes bison, we'll never know. Keeping the list as short as possible will give us a lot of useful information. A shorter list could be: `Priority: Important' or better plus gcc, binutils, libc6-dev and make. Comments? -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3ia Charset: latin1 iQCVAgUBNFCK2yqK7IlOjMLFAQHE9wP+I0Wrukdj4xt3tXLnYKQ8R75SjXBg7cJG 5XwwFXkttYwJQWZppJNI/GbSo/WL1oJSlP6nl/09I+CvbOv8NNepblmVXes8WmNS uWnx+c0eM96t469OQuB91Nupu8uI3uIZN6tDrNLt2stEpW8BDDY2AXLyg7XSufYs AqTzMaBUlJ4= =wOig -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
