[arch-general] Why irrelevant updates?
Vitor Eiji Justus Sakaguti
vitoreiji0 at gmail.com
Wed May 13 05:12:22 UTC 2015
On Wed, May 13, 2015 at 12:51 AM, Eli Schwartz <eschwartz93 at gmail.com> wrote:
> It is what it is. FWIW -- I don't think they are "expected", base is a
> guideline and other packages should not be making assumptions (and usually
> I think it could reasonably be expected that one has things like
> bash/sed/tar installed, but anything likely to be manually removed from
> base I expect to be listed in package dependencies.
Actually, the wiki says that the base group is always assumed to be
installed  and many packages will not explicitly depend on anything
that is in the base group even though it does depend on it in reality.
Some bug reports about package dependencies are closed because the
dependency is in the base group .
More information about the arch-general