Marc Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Thu, Apr 13, 2006 at 04:43:20PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> Well, I do. Depends is also used for package configuration. If the >> package can't configure itself without those packages, Depends is >> appropriate. > The problem with discover, IMHO, is that once it gets installed, it's > not going to be just called upon as part of producing a working X > configuration. It's going to screw things up every time the machine > reboots, since it has an init script. > Or it used to. CD-ROMs that come and go randomly, interfaces that get > renamed for no apparent reason, etc. > OTOT, I have to admit that none of Debian's auto-detection tools save > for hotplug (and now udev) have been allowed on any box I control in a > very long time, so perhaps that's changed. Certainly udev has the same > or similar set of problems. Well, I run discover on all my systems as a matter of course, so I suppose I'm not the most sympathetic of audiences. I've not had those problems with it. However... > If it were a dependency of a meta-package, at least you could remove it > and only lose the meta-package. But xserver-xorg *depends* on it now, > rather than just recommending it, so you're stuck with it. ...it sounds like your primary objection is to the boottime behavior, not to the use for X configuration. I do still see the case for changing from Depends to Recommends provided that the X configuration sequence supports it, but for your main complaint, can't you just disable the init script? -- Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
