Re: Depending on an essential package
Goswin von Brederlow [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Reduces the memory wasted and speeds up processing in dpkg, dselect, apt, aptitude, britney, ... It's also useful for simple humans looking at the dependencies of a package: having all dependencies, including those on essential packages, would clutter the Depends line without adding much value in most cases. For instance, I would not be very interested to learn that $PACKAGE depends on debianutils for the only reason that it uses /usr/bin/which or /bin/mktemp in a script. But several such explicit dependencies would really clutter the Depends line, and /that/ would be annoying. -- Florent -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Depending on an essential package
Marc Haber [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Mon, 18 Sep 2006 04:33:49 -0700, Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The error is, if you don't *need* a specific version of the package, you shouldn't depend on it at /all/. Essential means it's always available, so there's no reason for you to depend on it. I have never understood the reason for this rule, as it is bound to introduce truckloads of RC bugs whenever a package is moved out of essential. Greetings Marc Reduces the memory wasted and speeds up processing in dpkg, dselect, apt, aptitude, britney, ... MfG Goswin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Depending on an essential package
On Mon, 18 Sep 2006 04:33:49 -0700, Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The error is, if you don't *need* a specific version of the package, you shouldn't depend on it at /all/. Essential means it's always available, so there's no reason for you to depend on it. I have never understood the reason for this rule, as it is bound to introduce truckloads of RC bugs whenever a package is moved out of essential. Greetings Marc -- -- !! No courtesy copies, please !! - Marc Haber |Questions are the | Mailadresse im Header Mannheim, Germany | Beginning of Wisdom | http://www.zugschlus.de/ Nordisch by Nature | Lt. Worf, TNG Rightful Heir | Fon: *49 621 72739834
Re: Depending on an essential package
On Mon, Oct 30, 2006 at 01:06:08PM +0100, Marc Haber wrote: On Mon, 18 Sep 2006 04:33:49 -0700, Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The error is, if you don't *need* a specific version of the package, you shouldn't depend on it at /all/. Essential means it's always available, so there's no reason for you to depend on it. I have never understood the reason for this rule, as it is bound to introduce truckloads of RC bugs whenever a package is moved out of essential. The idea of essential packages is to avoid truckloads of dependencies on them. Packages aren't moved out of essential. For that reason, libraries (such as libc) cannot be essential, as the new package would move in and the old one move out on a soname change. Explicitly naming these dependencies doesn't help either, because hardly anyone will ever test things on a system where an essential package is missing. That is, even things like pbuilder and piuparts need a minimal system for testing, and that is defined as essential packages only (plus build-essential in the case of package building). Thanks, Bas -- I encourage people to send encrypted e-mail (see http://www.gnupg.org). If you have problems reading my e-mail, use a better reader. Please send the central message of e-mails as plain text in the message body, not as HTML and definitely not as MS Word. Please do not use the MS Word format for attachments either. For more information, see http://pcbcn10.phys.rug.nl/e-mail.html signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Depending on an essential package
On Mon, Oct 30, 2006 at 02:01:54PM +0100, Marc Haber wrote: On Mon, Oct 30, 2006 at 01:59:05PM +0100, Bas Wijnen wrote: Packages aren't moved out of essential. So you can guarantee that bash will always be essential? Certainly not. :-) I'm saying that we don't plan to ever make it non-essential, but plans can change. ;-) However, moving a package out of essential is not done lightly, since as you mentioned, it likely results in breaking lots of packages. Thanks, Bas -- I encourage people to send encrypted e-mail (see http://www.gnupg.org). If you have problems reading my e-mail, use a better reader. Please send the central message of e-mails as plain text in the message body, not as HTML and definitely not as MS Word. Please do not use the MS Word format for attachments either. For more information, see http://pcbcn10.phys.rug.nl/e-mail.html signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Depending on an essential package
On Mon, Oct 30, 2006 at 02:01:54PM +0100, Marc Haber wrote: On Mon, Oct 30, 2006 at 01:59:05PM +0100, Bas Wijnen wrote: Packages aren't moved out of essential. So you can guarantee that bash will always be essential? I believe that we won't ever remove *functionality* from the Essential system, yes. (We have removed individual packages from Essential, because their functionality was moved to a different package due to renames/splits/merges.) -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Depending on an essential package
Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Mon, Oct 30, 2006 at 02:01:54PM +0100, Marc Haber wrote: On Mon, Oct 30, 2006 at 01:59:05PM +0100, Bas Wijnen wrote: Packages aren't moved out of essential. So you can guarantee that bash will always be essential? I believe that we won't ever remove *functionality* from the Essential system, yes. Yeah, I can't imagine us ever doing so. (We have removed individual packages from Essential, because their functionality was moved to a different package due to renames/splits/merges.) ...thus making the dependency on the old package an RC bug (eventually), meaning that omitting dependencies on essential packages *prevents* RC bugs. :) -- Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Depending on an essential package
Hi everybody, if I add a dependency on util-linux because I need that /sbin/getty is installed, why must this dependency be versioned? If I simply add Depends: util-linux lintian complains loudly and issues an error message: depends-on-essential-package-without-using-version depends: util-linux I could of course pick a random version number to make lintian happy, I simply don't know which explicit version I should choose otherwise. As said, the only requirement I have is that /sbin/getty is installed. Should I simply ignore the lintian error? Michael -- Why is it that all of the instruments seeking intelligent life in the universe are pointed away from Earth? signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Depending on an essential package
On Mon, Sep 18, 2006 at 01:29:27PM +0200, Michael Biebl wrote: if I add a dependency on util-linux because I need that /sbin/getty is installed, why must this dependency be versioned? If I simply add Depends: util-linux lintian complains loudly and issues an error message: depends-on-essential-package-without-using-version depends: util-linux I could of course pick a random version number to make lintian happy, I simply don't know which explicit version I should choose otherwise. As said, the only requirement I have is that /sbin/getty is installed. Should I simply ignore the lintian error? The error is, if you don't *need* a specific version of the package, you shouldn't depend on it at /all/. Essential means it's always available, so there's no reason for you to depend on it. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Depending on an essential package
Steve Langasek wrote: On Mon, Sep 18, 2006 at 01:29:27PM +0200, Michael Biebl wrote: if I add a dependency on util-linux because I need that /sbin/getty is installed, why must this dependency be versioned? If I simply add Depends: util-linux lintian complains loudly and issues an error message: depends-on-essential-package-without-using-version depends: util-linux I could of course pick a random version number to make lintian happy, I simply don't know which explicit version I should choose otherwise. As said, the only requirement I have is that /sbin/getty is installed. Should I simply ignore the lintian error? The error is, if you don't *need* a specific version of the package, you shouldn't depend on it at /all/. Essential means it's always available, so there's no reason for you to depend on it. Sounds reasonable. Thanks for the explanation. Sometimes I wished lintian would display hints like yours and not only such short one liners. Cheers, Michael -- Why is it that all of the instruments seeking intelligent life in the universe are pointed away from Earth? signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Depending on an essential package
On Mon, Sep 18, 2006 at 04:38:28PM +0200, Michael Biebl wrote: Sounds reasonable. Thanks for the explanation. Sometimes I wished lintian would display hints like yours and not only such short one liners. The same explanation that Steve gave is found in the Debian Policy and/or the developer reference. Hopefully, you have read both of those. Regards, -Roberto -- Roberto C. Sanchez http://people.connexer.com/~roberto signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Depending on an essential package
On Mon, Sep 18, 2006 at 04:38:28PM +0200, Michael Biebl wrote: Sometimes I wished lintian would display hints like yours and not only such short one liners. Use lintian -i for more verbose output. Cheers, Franz -- Franz Pletz \ A little knowledge is a dangerous thing. www: http://franz-pletz.org/ \ So is a lot. email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] \ -- Albert Einstein -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Depending on an essential package
Hi, Sometimes I wished lintian would display hints like yours and not only such short one liners. The same explanation that Steve gave is found in the Debian Policy and/or the developer reference. Hopefully, you have read both of those. If you use lintian -i you get a more detailed explanation about the problem found. In this case it even provides a pointer to the appropriate section of the Debian Policy. Cheers, Sebastian -- Sebastian tokkee Harl GnuPG-ID: 0x8501C7FC http://tokkee.org/ signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Depending on an essential package
Franz Pletz wrote: On Mon, Sep 18, 2006 at 04:38:28PM +0200, Michael Biebl wrote: Sometimes I wished lintian would display hints like yours and not only such short one liners. Use lintian -i for more verbose output. Mea culpa! I indeed missed -i completely. Next time I better learn how to use lintian correctly, before I complain again. Thanks to all for the pointers. Cheers, Michael -- Why is it that all of the instruments seeking intelligent life in the universe are pointed away from Earth? signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
