Steve Greenland wrote: > This really seems like something that while they may, very occasionally, > be required, are mostly unnecessary and often misused.
Rather, I'd characterise it as a feature that is necessary for any general-purpose depencency-based system to be complete[1], which is totally safe and does not adversely affect any aspect of the system if some simple rules are followed, and which, if used incorrectly, is still orders of magnitude safer than other dpkg features, such as its support for setuid files, or its support for postinst scripts that run arbitrary code at install time. -- see shy jo [1] Regardless of hackarounds like essential packages not needing dependencies.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
