Randy McMurchy wrote: > My take is that Recommended is actually wrong here. I think the proper > syntax should be: > > <bridgehead renderas="sect4">Required</bridgehead> > <para role="required"><xref linkend="gpm"/> (if mouse support is > desired) and > <xref linkend="openssl"/> (if SSL support is desired)</para> > > If you want the support these two dependencies provide, then the dependencies > are *required*. Let's actually use correct terminology in these types of > instances. > > Please, if you disagree or have comments feel free to provide them. I'm > simply making suggestions here. I would like feedback from others. > I'm not seeing it the same way. In fact, gpm should be an optional dependency IMO.
Required: Package will not build/install/work without it. Recommended: Package looses significant functionality without it or (new) causes issues with other packages if omitted. Optional: Package gets additional functionality if it's included. Of course, Lynx/Links might just be a bad example for me. I've used one of them in graphical mode exactly once in my life. I consider them to be text browsers...mouse support and graphics are unneeded extras IMO. But, recommended is always subject to opinion, that's why I suggested peer review before adding a recommended dep for any future changes. A review of the existing recommendations can't hurt. 80 packages? Won't take all that long. -- DJ Lucas -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content, and is believed to be clean. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
