[pacman-dev] "explicit dependencies", a compromise between explicit and deps

Loui louipc.ist at gmail.com
Sun Oct 12 09:16:01 EDT 2008


On Sun, Oct 12, 2008 at 01:25:38PM +0200, Dieter Plaetinck wrote:
> - in a backup/restore or clone system scenario the usual approach is to  
> do 'pacman -Qe' to get a package list.  When restoring/installing the  
> list on another box this means we install only the explicit packages and  
> their dependencies.  Some packages we installed ourself --asdeps will  
> get lost.  This is not always good.  A current workaround would be to  
> install these packages explicitly, but doesn't always feel right either  
> because we don't want the package explictly, although we do want them  
> because they provide features to a package even though it's not really  
> needed.  In fact, this is very similar to the 'recommends' directive in  
> debian package.  Many arch packages literally say 'install x to have  
> feature foo, install y to have feature bar' (these are the 'recommended'  
> packages).  If the user then installs x or y they are not really  
> explicit packages (because we only want them because we use another  
> package that recommends them), but they are not dependencies either  
> (otherwise they will get lost)

What you should do is install those packages explicitly and they should
be registered as explicit packages but also show up as dependencies.




More information about the pacman-dev mailing list