This is the mail archive of the cygwin-apps mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
On Dec 10 11:29, Marco Atzeri wrote: > On 12/10/2014 10:54 AM, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > >On Dec 9 23:19, Marco Atzeri wrote: > >>To me sounds wrong the concept, why we should hide this check to > >>the users ? > >>I have seen recently too many wrong dependencies pullings extra > >>unnecessary packages. I prefer to have users that could note the > >>issue and complain instead of installing "everything but the kitchen sink" > >>behind their back. > > > >Did you (and Ken) get me wrong, by any chance? > > > >What I was trying to say is *not* to remove the dependency dialog. What > >I was trying to say is *only* to remove the check box in that dialog, > >which allows to install the selected packages without their dependencies. > >Just this check box. > > > >Such a check-box, or its equivalent on the command line, doesn't exist > >in other installers either. Giving the choice to install without the > >dependencies is in 99% of the cases wrong. > > > >If you install package A on Fedora, the installer will tell you it has > >to install packages B, C, and D, to fullfill the dependencies for A. > >The choice you have is to install A, B, C and D, or nothing at all. > >There's no choice to install package A alone, which is what this > >check box allows. > > > >Again, the dialog itself is fine. The choice to install without the > >deps usually is not. *Iff* it's fine, then only for users who know > >what they are doing. > > > >As for the dialog itself, I just think it would make sense to fullfil > >deps of Base packages automatically. If the user chooses to install > >other packages outside Base, and these packages have additional deps, > >then *of course* the additional deps should show up in that dialog. > > > >Does that clarify what I mean? I'm sorry if my original mail was > >unclear. > > Hi Corinna, > It is/was clear, but I still disagree. > I do not see the advantage of such reduced or hidden option. Hidden to the normal user for which ignoring deps would typically result in a broken installation. Visible to the knowledgable user. > I used a lot of time the check box to avoid pulling > unwanted/questionable dependencies (eg gcc-java pulling python3..). Wouldn't it be better instead to discuss and then remove these questionable deps as soon as you notice them? > Last time I used RPM, it still allowed to force install > ignoring dependency. I was more talking about yum or KDE's Apper. To ignore deps in RPM you have to know and use the --nodeps option as well. Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to Cygwin Maintainer cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Red Hat
Attachment:
pgphIrMdkSkC3.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |