[NTLUG:Discuss] Debian

[Terry]

On 6/25/05, Pat Regan <thehead at patshead.com> wrote:
> Kevin Brannen wrote:
> > Yes, this is probably the issue.  The most common one I've seen is when
> > I install KDE and it seems to demand I install sane and xsane, but I
> > don't have a scanner on the system, so that's just wasted space.  I've
> > always felt that an easy solution to this is for the distro authors (or
> > maybe it's the app authors) to create an optional "null" lib (or null
> > app) that can be installed to satisfiy the dependency, but is otherwise
> > empty.  I haven't seen that, but it sounds good on when I think about
> > it. :-)
> 
> I am certainly not informed enough to know what the truth is, so I will
> have to go with the hypothetical :).
> 
> I will assume that some package belonging to KDE has a Gimp-alike type
> application.  If you have that application installed, it may "require"
> sane to be installed.
> 
> Now if we define "require" in such a way that if sane is not installed
> this program will fail to function at all, then the packager did the
> correct thing.  On the other hand, the scanning features may just fail
> gracefully.  If that is the case it should not depend on sane, but it
> should "suggest" or "recommend" sane be installed.
> 
> I am assuming RPM packages can define similar dependencies.
> 
> There is also the fact then generally many applications belonging to
> Gnome and KDE tend to get lumped into a single package.  So, to invent
> an example...
> 
> Lets say that KDE graphics application is part of koffice and your
> distribution lumps each piece of koffice into a single package and that
> this program "depends" on sane.  You would have no way of installing
> kword without installing sane because the graphics program depends on it.
> 
> We are at the mercy of the people who are building out packages,
> assuming of course we want the convenience of not rolling out own
> install every time we upgrade :).  Most of the time they do a pretty
> darn good job, and I thank them wholeheartedly for saving me so much
> effort :).
> 
> I don't know about you, but I don't mind putting up with a few extra
> bits and pieces I don't need just so I don't have to deal with
> "dependency hell" like I did 5 (or more?) years ago.  Although even if I
> didn't have apt to do the work for me, the dependencies would be no
> different, and I probably wouldn't be able to uninstall sane :).

Amen. 
Hard drives are bigger and cheaper now anyway and so  space is not a
problem anymore.
i.e. A full install for slackware is only 3g. Even those of us with
the most hardware-challenged systems have at least a 6g HD.  And
anyone that does a dual boot nowadays will just add a second drive for
it.

If you do a full install, you only run into dependency issues when
installing after-market applications and those would be rare cases.
I realize that some of you are talking from the server install
prospective, which would make this comment irrelevant for sure, and
really, doing a full  install of a distro is only a work around, does
not solve the issue, just avoids it. But just thought I'd throw this
in here anyway, for whatever it's worth.

-- 
<><