does mc really require perl*?

Bill Nottingham notting at redhat.com
Wed Sep 11 19:54:33 UTC 2013


Miroslav Suchý (msuchy at redhat.com) said: 
> On 09/11/2013 01:24 PM, Matěj Cepl wrote:
> >Debian apt* programs have either option to always follow/not-follow
> >these soft-dependencies, or they will just select for installation all
> >packages on which the selected package(s) Depends and then nicely ask
> >user whether she wants to install also suggested/recommended packages.
> 
> To be precise IIRC:
> * Depends are always installed
> * Recommends are selected but you can remove from list before installation
> * Suggests and Enhances are offered for selections, but not selected by default and user must select it manually

The problem with soft dependencies has always been the semantics and the
workflow, not the implementation.  Even as you describe here with defined
semantics, that makes assumptions about the workflow, namely that to make
use of them:
- the installers are interactive in ways that most of our frontends aren't
- that we're designing for the case where the person handling software
  installation is interested in this level of platform micromanagement
  (Admittedly, our focus on exposing individual RPMs to the user drives this
  issue in spades, and in fact drives how our entire ecosystem works, or,
  in many cases, doesn't work.)

Bill


More information about the devel mailing list