True, the package does what it says it does, but I think it should say something else ;) Alternatively, we could add a (meta)package that does it the other way:
Evolution is not a required Ubuntu package; it is recommended by ubuntu- desktop, but not required. So I can have a perfectly good Ubuntu installation without Evolution. But if I want to add the debug symbols for all the programs I use, I'm forced to either install Evolution, or to install a few dozen dbg packages by hand. I think a debug meta-package like this should recommend rather than depend on the dbg packages, because they're not really essential to make things work. So either we should add a package (or modify this one) that has the -dbg ones as a recommendation, or at least to have necessary packages as depends and optional ones as recommends. (This doesn't prevent individual -dbg packages to depend on one another, though.) * * * On another point of view, wouldn't it make sense to have normal packages recommend their -dbg equivalents? Perhaps we could do that during work on a release, and than remove such recommendations just before the first release candidate. -- [hardy] gnome-dbg depends on evolution-dbg https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/174916 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is the bug contact for Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
