Tushar Teredesai wrote these words on 01/23/06 18:41 CST: > If a discussion is needed, do start a new thread. I do have some comments:)
Alrighty then, bring it on. I'll start. I believe there is a limited, but entirely useful use of recommended dependencies. Here is a case in point (generalized and not package-specific) Packages that don't require OpenSSL, yet can use it, and if it isn't used and you install the package, results in an insecure environment. Sure, we could list OpenSSL as optional, and then provide a note saying how dangerous it is to install the package without it, but then what is the difference in that as opposed to just saying the dependency is recommended? -- Randy rmlscsi: [GNU ld version 2.15.94.0.2 20041220] [gcc (GCC) 3.4.3] [GNU C Library stable release version 2.3.4] [Linux 2.6.10 i686] 18:43:00 up 121 days, 4:07, 3 users, load average: 0.00, 0.08, 0.33 -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
