Julian Gilbey wrote: > On Mon, May 07, 2001 at 11:42:49AM -0400, Mark Eichin wrote: > > err, does this break the use of tasks with apt-get later on? I've > > found it very useful to do (for example) "apt-get install > > task-x-window-system" > > after getting a machine otherwise working (in particular, that's the > > easy way to go to xf4 - install 2.2, then point to testing, then > > apt-get install task-x-window-system which pulls in the right things from > > testing...) > > My thought was that apt and dselect would be taught to recognise > Tasks: as a new type of dependency header, similar to Depends, > Recommends and Suggests, but with slightly different rules.
If this were done, I would much prefer it were called Reverse-Recommends, since such a thing is useful for other purposes too. I was thinking that the relationship created by a Task: field is a reverse dependancy, but that is not true, it is not as hard a relation as a dependancy since it can be overridden in many ways (the simplest being, get a Packages file that does not include the package with the Task: field). Instead, it's like a recommends. And while we're at it, we could implement Reverse-Suggests too, and finally satisfy RMS.. -- see shy jo
