Your message dated Fri, 22 Nov 2024 13:03:02 +0100
with message-id <[email protected]>
and subject line Re: Bug#942303: Weak-Depends - something in the middle between
'Recommends:' and 'Depends:'
has caused the Debian Bug report #942303,
regarding Weak-Depends - something in the middle between 'Recommends:' and
'Depends:'
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact [email protected]
immediately.)
--
942303: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=942303
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact [email protected] with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: dpkg
Severity: wishlist
X-Debbugs-CC: [email protected]
It would be useful if there was something in between of 'Recommends:'
and 'Depends:'.
“Weak-Depends”
Similar to “Depends”. It lists packages that get installed when using
'apt --no-install-recommends meta-package', but any package listed there
can be removed without removing the meta-package which referenced the
Weak-Depends:.
In other words…
“Weak-Depends”: Declares a weak dependency. Most users of this package
may benefit from installing packages listed in this field, but can have
reasonable functionality without them.
The “Suggests” debian/control field does not work for this use case.
Very few users are using ‘apt --install-suggests’. And ‘apt
--no-install-suggests’ is the default. Also when using ‘apt
dist-upgrade’ this leads to inconsistencies:
- newly added packages to “Suggests” are not installed
- removed packages from “Suggests” aren’t removed
Use case:
Let’s take for example the meta package ‘lxde’. Sometimes users are
happy with such meta packages generally and would like to keep it.
However, ‘lxde’ ‘Depends:’ on ‘galculator’. Maybe a user prefers a
different calculator and wants to remove that one.
(Let’s assume galculator isn’t essential for lxde. I guess it is. But if
it isn’t, please don’t concentrate on the specific example but the
general use case. There are many such examples.)
[This isn’t the best example too. Perhaps things that take a lot disk
space or are more intrusive such as context menu integrations by file
compressors are more worthwhile.]
In that case removal of galculator would lead to removal of lxde. Next
time “apt autoremove” is being run other packages which are not intended
by the user to be uninstalled get uninstalled. Something simple as
removal of galculator isn’t that simple. Would galculator move from
“Depends” to “Weak-Depends” everything would be perfect.
Cheers,
Patrick
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Control: tag -1 wontfix
Hi!
On Mon, 2019-10-14 at 08:53:00 +0000, Patrick Schleizer wrote:
> Package: dpkg
> Severity: wishlist
> X-Debbugs-CC: [email protected]
> It would be useful if there was something in between of 'Recommends:'
> and 'Depends:'.
>
> “Weak-Depends”
>
> Similar to “Depends”. It lists packages that get installed when using
> 'apt --no-install-recommends meta-package', but any package listed there
> can be removed without removing the meta-package which referenced the
> Weak-Depends:.
>
> In other words…
>
> “Weak-Depends”: Declares a weak dependency. Most users of this package
> may benefit from installing packages listed in this field, but can have
> reasonable functionality without them.
>
>
> The “Suggests” debian/control field does not work for this use case.
> Very few users are using ‘apt --install-suggests’. And ‘apt
> --no-install-suggests’ is the default. Also when using ‘apt
> dist-upgrade’ this leads to inconsistencies:
>
> - newly added packages to “Suggests” are not installed
> - removed packages from “Suggests” aren’t removed
>
> Use case:
>
> Let’s take for example the meta package ‘lxde’. Sometimes users are
> happy with such meta packages generally and would like to keep it.
> However, ‘lxde’ ‘Depends:’ on ‘galculator’. Maybe a user prefers a
> different calculator and wants to remove that one.
>
> (Let’s assume galculator isn’t essential for lxde. I guess it is. But if
> it isn’t, please don’t concentrate on the specific example but the
> general use case. There are many such examples.)
>
> [This isn’t the best example too. Perhaps things that take a lot disk
> space or are more intrusive such as context menu integrations by file
> compressors are more worthwhile.]
>
> In that case removal of galculator would lead to removal of lxde. Next
> time “apt autoremove” is being run other packages which are not intended
> by the user to be uninstalled get uninstalled. Something simple as
> removal of galculator isn’t that simple. Would galculator move from
> “Depends” to “Weak-Depends” everything would be perfect.
There was a recent discussion on debian-devel about adding something
like this field, where the overwhelming response was that this would
cause more problems than what it might apparently solve. See thread:
<https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2024/11/msg00018.html>
I concur with those conclusion, so I'm going to mark this as wontfix,
and close this report.
Thanks,
Guillem
--- End Message ---
