On Fri, May 18, 2012 at 08:40:54AM +0200, Christian PERRIER wrote: > I notice that I forgot to explain the reasons for which I did the > split: I have found admins at my workplace often confused by the fact > that libPAM-<something> was needed to install libNSS-<something> in > the case of winbind. So, seeing that some other person was advocating > for this has been the final convincing step (also seeing that we have > other libnss-<something> packages in Debian, too).
Right, fair enough. I'm not really objecting to the split or asking for it to be reverted, just noting that I didn't think it was worth doing. But I didn't have to do it. ;) On Fri, May 18, 2012 at 10:55:50AM +0200, Ivo De Decker wrote: > What's wrong with using recommends in this case? This allows users to use > libpam-winbind without libnss-winbind (whatever their use case would be), > while resolving the issues caused by the split. > There is no strong dependency between libpam-winbind and libnss-winbind. It's > just that libpam-winbind is usually used together with libnss-winbind. > Recommends seems more appropriate in this case. My principal concern here is that there are various misguided users who disable recommends by default on their systems. But on reflection, I think you're correct and Recommends is the right relationship here, since the packages would be found together "in all but unusual cases". -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
