On Thu, Aug 09, 2012 at 12:02:38AM +0200, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
Am I understanding you correctly in that your answer is «A Recommends
can never be upgraded to a Depends for a metapackage»?
I'd like to respond, somewhat belatedly, to this characterisation of the
proposed resolution, since I
Russ Allbery writes (Bug#681834: network-manager, gnome, Recommends vs
Depends):
Here's what I now have:
I would be happy with this wording. Does anyone else have any
comments ?
Thanks,
Ian.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ctte-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe
Ian Jackson ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk writes:
I have taken the liberty of making a version of it with the small
changes that I thought were appropriate.
I've done this in the tech-ctte.git repo so you if you pull can see
the diffs. Below is the full text of my revised proposal.
I've
Russ Allbery writes (Re: Bug#681834: network-manager, gnome, Recommends vs
Depends):
Tollef Fog Heen tfh...@err.no writes:
Am I understanding you correctly in that your answer is «A Recommends
can never be upgraded to a Depends for a metapackage»?
...
I think it depends on the purpose
Russ Allbery writes (Bug#681834: network-manager, gnome, Recommends vs
Depends):
Ian Jackson ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk writes:
How about this:
This doesn't feel quite right to me, but I'm not sure how to phrase my
feeling in terms of specific objections. Let me try to instead
Tollef Fog Heen writes (Re: Bug#681834: network-manager, gnome, Recommends vs
Depends):
Ian Jackson :
It seems to me that our objectives must include:
[...]
3. Users who deliberately removed network-manager in squeeze (which
they will generally have done by deliberately violating
How about this:
Whereas:
1. Our technical objectives are:
(i) Users who do not do anything special should get
network-manager along with gnome (in this case, along with
gnome-core). These users should continue to have
network-manager installed, across upgrades.
Julian Andres Klode writes (Re: Bug#681834: network-manager, gnome, Recommends
vs Depends):
I propose that you consider to have the gnome-core and gnome packages
moved to the metapackages section of the archive. This will cause
APT to mark the packages they depend on as manually installed
]] Ian Jackson
Whereas:
1. Our technical objectives are:
These objectives and the anti-objectives further down seem a bit random
to me, written more to fit the end goal than actually showing what the
objectives are.
[...]
(ii) Users should be able to conveniently install and
On Wed, Aug 08, 2012 at 04:54:36PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
2. Our technical objectives do NOT include:
[...]
(iii) Users who choose to globally disable Recommends should still
get the desired behaviours as described above in point 1.
This whole NOT part is very confusing to
]] Russ Allbery
Hi,
Ian Jackson ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk writes:
How about this:
This doesn't feel quite right to me, but I'm not sure how to phrase my
feeling in terms of specific objections. Let me try to instead draft the
sort of statement that I feel like I want to make
Russ Allbery writes (Re: Bug#681834: network-manager, gnome, Recommends vs
Depends):
As I understand it, the timeline here looks something like:
1. network-manager was a Recommends in squeeze.
2. GNOME maintainers get a bunch of bugs from confused users who don't
install Recommends
Ian Jackson ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk writes:
Russ Allbery writes:
As I understand it, the timeline here looks something like:
1. network-manager was a Recommends in squeeze.
2. GNOME maintainers get a bunch of bugs from confused users who don't
install Recommends for some reason
]] Ian Jackson
Hi,
It seems to me that our objectives must include:
[...]
3. Users who deliberately removed network-manager in squeeze (which
they will generally have done by deliberately violating the
Recommends from the gnome metapackage) should not have to do
anything special
Tollef Fog Heen tfh...@err.no writes:
]] Ian Jackson
3. Users who deliberately removed network-manager in squeeze (which
they will generally have done by deliberately violating the
Recommends from the gnome metapackage) should not have to do
anything special to avoid it coming back
It seems to me that our objectives must include:
1. Users who do not do anything special should get network-manager
along with gnome (in this case, along with gnome-core).
These users should continue to have network-manager installed,
across upgrades.
2. Users should be able to
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 01:55:03AM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
Experiemnts reported on debian-devel show that this `tight coupling'
is more a matter of doctrine than an actual hard functional
dependency.
Indeed on two of our platorms network-manager isn't even supported, so
it is just left
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 01:48:01AM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
Michael Biebl writes (Bug#681834: network-manager, gnome, Recommends vs
Depends):
We thus tried a compromise, where the network-manager postinst script
automatically comments out dhcp-type connections in /e/n/i (and restores
On 18.07.2012 23:40, Ian Jackson wrote:
Secondly, it is possible for dhcp entries to be non-trivial. They may
specify interesting scripts to be run, dhcp options, bridging, etc.
It's not clear to me exactly which of these scenarious result in
what outcome.
NM doesn't take over any such
Hi ctte
I just wanted to bring here an argument that came in debian-devel: the one
that says that n-m does not play well with usb0 type network interfaces [1].
I have not tested this myself, since I do not use a laptop and do not need an
USB network gadget on my desktop, so I can not confirm
block 645656 by 681834
thanks
The argument about the dependency from gnome-core to network-manager
has now reached the TC. This has been extensive discussed, most
recently on debian-devel. The most recent response from Josselin is
here:
Ian Jackson ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk writes:
* There is no good reason not to use Recommends (or indeed Suggests)
in a metapackage.
I'd like to respectfully disagree here - though I've tried to express
this on debian-devel@ too, apparently, with little success.
As a user, my
Ian Jackson ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk writes:
The argument about the dependency from gnome-core to network-manager
has now reached the TC.
FWIW, I use network-manager with xfce4 on my notebook, and with suitable
configuration find it an acceptable solution for my needs.
As a matter of
Gergely Nagy alger...@balabit.hu writes:
Ian Jackson ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk writes:
* There is no good reason not to use Recommends (or indeed Suggests)
in a metapackage.
I'd like to respectfully disagree here - though I've tried to express
this on debian-devel@ too,
Bdale Garbee writes (Re: Bug#681834: network-manager, gnome, Recommends vs
Depends):
Ian Jackson ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk writes:
* Overrule the maintainer of gnome-core, requiring that the
dependency on network-manager be changed to Recommends;
That would work.
I believe
Bdale Garbee writes (Bug#681834: network-manager, gnome, Recommends vs
Depends):
Gergely Nagy alger...@balabit.hu writes:
As a user, my expectation is that if I install a *meta* package, then
the whole platform will be installed, and will be kept installed. That's
the main reason I install
Bdale Garbee writes (Bug#681834: network-manager, gnome, Recommends vs
Depends):
I believe our goal should be to require that there not be a hard Depends
relationship. I would be equally satisfied if the dependency were just
dropped, or if it were possible to craft a suitable or list
On Martes, 17 de julio de 2012 16:39:47 Bdale Garbee wrote:
Gergely Nagy alger...@balabit.hu writes:
[...]
How about a solution suggested earlier on debian-devel@? At least one of
the Gnome maintainers showed interest in something like this:
* Introduce a gnome-minimal (or any other,
Noel David Torres Taño writes (Re: Bug#681834: network-manager, gnome,
Recommends vs Depends):
Core to the issue here is that the n-m Depends gets forced even into users
that wants the whole platform, that is, the 'gnome' package.
Right:
http://packages.debian.org/squeeze/gnome
Ian Jackson ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk writes:
Bdale Garbee writes:
Gergely Nagy alger...@balabit.hu writes:
As a user, my expectation is that if I install a *meta* package, then
the whole platform will be installed, and will be kept
installed. That's the main reason I install meta
On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 06:29:46PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
Noel David Torres Taño writes (Re: Bug#681834: network-manager, gnome,
Recommends vs Depends):
Core to the issue here is that the n-m Depends gets forced even into users
that wants the whole platform, that is, the 'gnome' package
Am 17.07.2012 14:56, schrieb Ian Jackson:
block 645656 by 681834
thanks
The argument about the dependency from gnome-core to network-manager
has now reached the TC. This has been extensive discussed, most
recently on debian-devel. The most recent response from Josselin is
here:
On 17.07.2012 22:30, Russ Allbery wrote:
Michael Biebl bi...@debian.org writes:
Also, as an alternative if you can't use network-manager for whatever
reasons, you can install gnome-core and disable network-manager. This
is as simple as
update-rc.d network-manager disable
[...]
As
Michael Biebl bi...@debian.org writes:
On 17.07.2012 22:30, Russ Allbery wrote:
If there's a clean way to disable network-manager, I think that's a
reasonable alternative to either creating yet another meta-package or
arguing about Depends vs. Recommends in gnome-core. But there seems to
be
On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 06:15:34PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
- GNOME upstream have declared Network Manager to be an integral
part of GNOME and the Debian maintainer is insisting on following
their lead in gnome-core. The maintainer is essentially asserting
that the very purpose
Philipp Kern writes (Re: Bug#681834: network-manager, gnome, Recommends vs
Depends):
On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 06:15:34PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
- GNOME upstream have declared Network Manager to be an integral
part of GNOME and the Debian maintainer is insisting on following
Michael Biebl writes (Bug#681834: network-manager, gnome, Recommends vs
Depends):
We thus tried a compromise, where the network-manager postinst script
automatically comments out dhcp-type connections in /e/n/i (and restores
them, in case the package is removed again,fwiw).
So just
Steve Langasek writes (Re: Bug#681834: network-manager, gnome, Recommends vs
Depends):
Ah; so in my previous message to the bug, I had overlooked that there was an
upgrade issue here. I agree that changing the network handling on upgrade
in this way is problematic, and that additional care
Michael Biebl writes (Re: network-manager, gnome, Recommends vs Depends):
Am 17.07.2012 14:56, schrieb Ian Jackson:
It seems to me that:
* n-m breaks the networking of enough people that this is a
significant problem which should be fixed.
This is pure FUD without further details.
Russ Allbery writes (Bug#681834: network-manager, gnome, Recommends vs
Depends):
Michael Biebl bi...@debian.org writes:
Also, as an alternative if you can't use network-manager for whatever
reasons, you can install gnome-core and disable network-manager. This
is as simple as
update
40 matches
Mail list logo
