[arch-general] Please settle 'base' in 'depends' for all
allan at archlinux.org
Wed Jan 19 02:08:27 EST 2011
On 19/01/11 15:19, Kaiting Chen wrote:
> Okay everyone, every time I ask I get a different answer. According to
> Dziedzic and Allan 'glibc' does *not* belong in 'depends'. Also Dziedzic
> votes that *no* package in 'base' should be in 'depends'. Can we settle once
> and for all what the correct policy is? And then can we update the wiki page
> and all of these packages
> http://www.archlinux.org/packages/core/i686/glibc/so that they reflect
> the policy? --Kaiting.
In general, I think packages in 'base' need listed. Mainly because I do
not install a fair number of the base packages and would have even less
of them installed if they were not listed as dependencies.
However, I think listing 'glibc' in depends is a waste of time. If a
system does not have glibc installed, there are worse issues than a
missing dependency for one package...
If we want to be really pedantic about dependencies, we should list
_ALL_ dependencies and not remove the ones that are dependencies of
dependencies. We never know what dependencies will be removed on an
update of a package in the dep chain. But we don't do this? Why?
Because it means pacman has to make less dependency checks and thus the
whole update process is a little faster, and it is more convenient to
not have to explicitly list everything. For those same reasons, I see
no need to list glibc as a dependency, especially for packages in
[extra] and [community].
More information about the arch-general