Hi, On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 10:27:19AM +0100, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote: > On lun, 2009-02-16 at 08:41 +0100, Xr wrote: > > I tend to disagree. I hardly ever install recommended packages and never > > see anything break. Missing functionalities are OK, but not breakage.
If you don't install any Recommends, you declare your system "unusual". > > I'm not really against putting xfce4-utils in the "Recommends" field, > > but it shouldn't break anything. If it breaks anything, then the package > > should depend on it. > > Well, that's the point since the beginning. What's a ???missing > functionality??? and what a ???breakage???. And basically in some case it's > not possible to please everyone. Well, the question is, what we call "acceptable on an unusual install", because that's the text in the policy. My interpretation of "unusual" is: You accept some problems, and you accept to be responsible for analyzing those problems first before crying "There's a bug". And if the answer is "I missed to install package Y, despite it being reocmmended", it's all your fault. ;) Here's one example I could quickly dig up: * libdbus-1-3 recommends dbus. Without dbus libdbus-1-3 is nearly unusable, and there wont be any desktop messaging. But people can live without it sometimes (me!). > (and Recommends: are installed by > default, if you don't install them it was a choice and they are > displayed as Recommended anyway) IMHO there are exactly two good reason for not installing a recommends: 1) You know, what you're doing AND 2) To conserve resources. Cheers, Elrond -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org