On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 07:11:39AM +0100, Christian PERRIER wrote: > Quoting Steve Langasek ([email protected]): > > > > So, well, after all, I wonder if my fix is really needed. > > > > Right, I don't think this change should be needed at all. I guess maybe Sam > > isn't using dependency-based boot? > > Yes, I guessed that. For this, I doubt we can really do somethign (or > want to). > > About the change I committed, I only have one pro argument: using > "Should-Start" in the package that needs another package to start > before seems more logical to me. > > Moreover, the "X-foo" fields in cups seem to indicate that they are > "less official" LSB headers. > > It's probably procrastinating but how about keeping my changes and > suggest the CUPS maintainer to drop the "X-foo" LSB headers?
That puts the dependency on the correct side, IMHO. -- Sam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
