On Wed, 15 Mar 2006 21:33:25 +0100, Jérôme Marant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Sven Joachim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> `Recommends' This declares a strong, but not absolute, dependency. >> >> The `Recommends' field should list packages that would be found >> together with this one in all but unusual installations. > It is a weak dependency regarding dpkg and apt. Only dselect > considers it as a strong one. And aptitude considers it a mildly strong one in the sense that it will automatically install recommended packages on initial install (unless specifically overridden). > (I hate advocating this but ...) > I'm surprised there is still a misunderstanding. Debian decided that > invariant sections were problematic (you will find rationales > everywhere on debian sites). It is not Debian's fault if they do > exist. Furthermore, Debian has been giving feedback to the FSF about > problems in the GFDL for years, but the FSF decided to ignore them. Just to clarify, AFAIK the FSF has been ignoring Debian only on the issue of invariant sections, because there seems to be a philosophical difference between the FSF and Debian regarding whether invariant sections are OK. Regarding the other license "bugs", I heard that the FSF is aware of them and agrees with Debian, but is just slow to fix it. (I guess getting GPL3 right is more important.) -- Hubert Chan - email & Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.uhoreg.ca/ PGP/GnuPG key: 1024D/124B61FA (Key available at wwwkeys.pgp.net) Fingerprint: 96C5 012F 5F74 A5F7 1FF7 5291 AF29 C719 124B 61FA
