[arch-dev-public] Adding a "posix" metapackage

Sébastien Luttringer seblu at seblu.net
Sat Jan 4 03:34:12 UTC 2020

On Sat, 2020-01-04 at 13:08 +1000, Allan McRae via arch-dev-public wrote:
> On 4/1/20 12:47 pm, Sébastien Luttringer via arch-dev-public wrote:
> > One unfortunate consequence could be to have packages rely on it to make
> > dependencies shorter, and make us pull cups or cronie.
> What?!  That is like saying one unfortunate consequence of pamcan hooks
> is that packages can have no files and just download and compile the
> source in a hook.  It is a ridiculous consideration.

Your extreme example seems, indeed, a ridiculous use of hooks.
I hadn't realized that adding posix as a dependency on a package will be as
extreme and ridiculous as the example that you have just gave.
My mistake.


Sébastien "Seblu" Luttringer

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 228 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-dev-public/attachments/20200104/d6cc089a/attachment.sig>

More information about the arch-dev-public mailing list