Hi! On Sun, 2024-11-03 at 15:24:07 +0100, Valentin Vidic wrote: > On Thu, Oct 17, 2024 at 03:47:10PM +0200, Michael Prokop wrote: > > That could be worth a thought, yes. Having a good upgrade path even > > for users without Recommends enabled, but at the same time also > > having the option to install only *certain* fence-agents is > > definitely a worthwhile goal. :) > > How about including all the packages in Depends, but introducting a > virtual package fence-agent: > > Package: fence-agents > Depends: fence-agents-ack-manual, fence-agents-aliyun, fence-agents-alom, ... > > Package: fence-agents-ack-manual > Provides: fence-agent > > Package: fence-agents-aliyun > Provides: fence-agent > > Package: fence-agents-alom > Provides: fence-agent > > Package: pacemaker > Recommends: fence-agents | fence-agent, pacemaker-cli-utils > > Now during upgrade the users can select to install all agents with > increased disk usage by default or to only keep the few agents they > really need.
There is precedent for this kind of packaging pattern for example: Package: xserver-xorg Depends: […] xserver-xorg-input-all | xorg-driver-input, xserver-xorg-video-all | xorg-driver-video, Package: libva2 Recommends: […] va-driver-all | va-driver, Package: libvdpau1 Recommends: […] vdpau-driver-all | vdpau-driver, (And other like: soapysdr-module-all, mupen64plus-input-all, mupen64plus-video-all, mupen64plus-audio-all, mupen64plus-rsp-all.) But, yeah I think it would make sense to have a package that has strong dependencies on either all or the most used/important ones (and the reset as Recommends like the xserver-xorg-*-all ones). That could be either the existing fence-agents or a new fence-agents-all, and as you mention then adding the fence-agent virtuals. Thanks, Guillem
