Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.user > #211284 > unrolled thread

useless languages

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.user

Contents

  useless languages Pierre Frenkiel <pierre.frenkiel@gmail.com> - 2019-07-12 13:10 +0200
    Re: useless languages Reco <recoverym4n@enotuniq.net> - 2019-07-12 13:10 +0200
      Re: useless languages Jonas Smedegaard <jonas@jones.dk> - 2019-07-12 13:40 +0200
        Re: useless languages Reco <recoverym4n@enotuniq.net> - 2019-07-12 14:10 +0200
          Don't disable recoomends by default Jonas Smedegaard <jonas@jones.dk> - 2019-07-12 14:20 +0200
            Re: Don't disable recoomends by default Stephan Seitz <stse+debian@fsing.rootsland.net> - 2019-07-12 14:40 +0200
              Re: Don't disable recoomends by default Jonas Smedegaard <jonas@jones.dk> - 2019-07-12 17:20 +0200
                Re: Don't disable recoomends by default Dan Ritter <dsr@randomstring.org> - 2019-07-12 17:30 +0200
                  Re: Don't disable recoomends by default Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2019-07-12 19:00 +0200
                Re: Don't disable recoomends by default Urs Thuermann <urs@isnogud.escape.de> - 2019-08-05 23:10 +0200
                  Re: Don't disable recoomends by default Jonas Smedegaard <jonas@jones.dk> - 2019-08-05 23:50 +0200
                  Re: Don't disable recoomends by default Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> - 2019-08-06 07:50 +0200
                    Re: Don't disable recoomends by default Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2019-08-06 12:10 +0200
                  Re: Don't disable recoomends by default <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2019-08-06 09:40 +0200
                    Re: Don't disable recoomends by default Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2019-08-06 20:50 +0200
                      Re: Don't disable recoomends by default <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2019-08-07 09:20 +0200
                  Re: Don't disable recoomends by default Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2019-08-06 13:20 +0200
                  Re: Don't disable recoomends by default Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2019-08-06 15:00 +0200
                  Re: Don't disable recoomends by default Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2019-08-06 20:00 +0200
                  Re: Don't disable recoomends by default Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2019-08-06 21:50 +0200
            Re: Don't disable recoomends by default Reco <recoverym4n@enotuniq.net> - 2019-07-12 14:40 +0200
              Re: Don't disable recoomends by default Jonas Smedegaard <jonas@jones.dk> - 2019-07-12 17:30 +0200
                Re: Don't disable recoomends by default Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2019-07-12 19:20 +0200
                Re: Don't disable recoomends by default Reco <recoverym4n@enotuniq.net> - 2019-07-12 19:30 +0200
                  Re: Don't disable recoomends by default Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2019-07-12 20:00 +0200
                  Re: Don't disable recoomends by default Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> - 2019-07-12 23:20 +0200
                    Re: Don't disable recoomends by default Jonas Smedegaard <jonas@jones.dk> - 2019-07-12 23:40 +0200
                      Re: Don't disable recoomends by default John Crawley <john@bunsenlabs.org> - 2019-07-13 04:00 +0200
                        Re: Don't disable recoomends by default Jonas Smedegaard <jonas@jones.dk> - 2019-07-13 04:30 +0200
                          Re: Don't disable recoomends by default Urs Thuermann <urs@isnogud.escape.de> - 2019-08-05 23:10 +0200
                            Re: Don't disable recoomends by default Michael Stone <mstone@debian.org> - 2019-08-05 23:30 +0200
                    Re: Don't disable recoomends by default Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2019-07-12 23:50 +0200
                      Re: Don't disable recoomends by default Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> - 2019-07-13 06:50 +0200
                    Re: Don't disable recoomends by default Curt <curty@free.fr> - 2019-07-13 10:40 +0200
                      Re: Don't disable recoomends by default Jonas Smedegaard <jonas@jones.dk> - 2019-07-13 14:00 +0200
                    Re: Don't disable recoomends by default mick crane <mick.crane@gmail.com> - 2019-08-06 09:40 +0200
    Re: useless languages David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> - 2019-07-13 04:30 +0200
      Re: useless languages Pierre Frenkiel <pierre.frenkiel@gmail.com> - 2019-07-13 09:30 +0200
      Re: useless languages Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2019-07-13 16:30 +0200
    Re: useless localisation files Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> - 2019-07-13 06:40 +0200

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#211284 — useless languages

hi,
when installing some packages (chromiun for example), I get a lot of
useless languages (task-marathi-desktop task-nepali-desktop ...)
Is there a way to get rid of them?

best regards,
-- 
Pierre Frenkiel

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#211285

	Hi.

On Fri, Jul 12, 2019 at 01:03:33PM +0200, Pierre Frenkiel wrote:
> hi,
> when installing some packages (chromiun for example), I get a lot of
> useless languages (task-marathi-desktop task-nepali-desktop ...)
> Is there a way to get rid of them?

apt install chromium task-marathi-desktop- task-nepali-desktop- ...-

Disabling installing Recommends by default also helps a great deal with
all those dependencies you don't want.

Reco

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#211288

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Hi Pierre,

Quoting Reco (2019-07-12 08:09:03)
> On Fri, Jul 12, 2019 at 01:03:33PM +0200, Pierre Frenkiel wrote:
> > when installing some packages (chromiun for example), I get a lot of 
> > useless languages (task-marathi-desktop task-nepali-desktop ...) Is 
> > there a way to get rid of them?

On Debian or somethins else (perhaps something derived from Debian, like 
Raspbian or Armbian or Ubuntu or Kubuntu or...)?

And which exact command causes chromium to pull in those task-* packages 
on your sysstem?

I ask because I cannot recognize that Debian systems (neither stable 
Buster or oldstable Stretch) has chromium recommend or even suggest any 
task-* packages.  So I suspect that you have something custom/derived 
causing this odd behaviour.


> apt install chromium task-marathi-desktop- task-nepali-desktop- ...-

Above would help if chromium was recommending task-* packages which it 
doesn't on Debian, so for Debian systems I doubt that would help here.


> Disabling installing Recommends by default also helps a great deal with
> all those dependencies you don't want.

Above may break your system in confusing to debug ways, so if you ever 
do that then make sure to clearly mention it when you later report bugs!


 - Jonas

-- 
 * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
 * Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/

 [x] quote me freely  [ ] ask before reusing  [ ] keep private

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#211289

	Hi.

On Fri, Jul 12, 2019 at 08:37:09AM -0300, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> > apt install chromium task-marathi-desktop- task-nepali-desktop- ...-
> 
> Above would help if chromium was recommending task-* packages which it 
> doesn't on Debian, so for Debian systems I doubt that would help here.

Try it sometime. If it's installed - it will be uninstalled.
If it's trying to install - it won't. Applies to the task* packages like
it applies to anything else.


> > Disabling installing Recommends by default also helps a great deal with
> > all those dependencies you don't want.
> 
> Above may break your system in confusing to debug ways,

Rly? Recommends are called that for a reason.
If Recommend is actually needed for the correct functioning of the
package - it's a bug in a package.
Recommends are useful sometime, and it's a useful default to install
them. But it comes with the cost and the cost is a dependency bloat.

Not installing the Depends - that's a creative way to break a system
indeed. But even this has its uses.


> so if you ever do that then make sure to clearly mention it when you
> later report bugs!

Try running reportbug in this case. It tells this particular setting
every time by showing which Recommends are installed and which are not.


In short, Debian's (and derivatives') package management and bug
reporting is more flexible that you seem to think it is.

Reco

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#211290 — Don't disable recoomends by default

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Quoting Reco (2019-07-12 09:01:33)
> > > Disabling installing Recommends by default also helps a great deal 
> > > with all those dependencies you don't want.
> > 
> > Above may break your system in confusing to debug ways,
> 
> Rly? Recommends are called that for a reason.

Yes, and the reason is well defined: Packages requires in "all but 
unusual installations." - quoted from Debian Policy §7.2.


> If Recommend is actually needed for the correct functioning of the
> package - it's a bug in a package.

Wrong.  If a package is possibly to use for any purpose at all, even if 
exotic and unusual, then it makes sense to recommend instead of depend 
on a package.


> Recommends are useful sometime, and it's a useful default to install 
> them. But it comes with the cost and the cost is a dependency bloat.

Wrong.  Suggests are for packages useful only "sometimes", recommends 
are for pacakges needed in "all but unusual installations."


 - Jonas

-- 
 * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
 * Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/

 [x] quote me freely  [ ] ask before reusing  [ ] keep private

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#211292 — Re: Don't disable recoomends by default

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Fr, Jul 12, 2019 at 09:13:29 -0300, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
>Wrong.  Suggests are for packages useful only "sometimes", recommends
>are for pacakges needed in "all but unusual installations."

From my experience this is wrong.

With recommends my d10 update would have systemd as init instead of 
sysvinit. And I would have got (for example) the package debsecan which 
I don’t need.

So it is better to disable recommends and look at the recommended 
packages.

Shade and sweet water!

	Stephan

-- 
| Public Keys: http://fsing.rootsland.net/~stse/keys.html |

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#211302 — Re: Don't disable recoomends by default

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Quoting Stephan Seitz (2019-07-12 09:30:38)
> On Fr, Jul 12, 2019 at 09:13:29 -0300, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> >Wrong.  Suggests are for packages useful only "sometimes", recommends
> >are for pacakges needed in "all but unusual installations."
> 
> From my experience this is wrong.
> 
> With recommends my d10 update would have systemd as init instead of 
> sysvinit. And I would have got (for example) the package debsecan 
> which I don’t need.
> 
> So it is better to disable recommends and look at the recommended 
> packages.

There is nothing wrong in suppressing specific recommendations where you 
understand the implications.

What is wrong is to suppress all recommendations by default.


 - Jonas

-- 
 * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
 * Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/

 [x] quote me freely  [ ] ask before reusing  [ ] keep private

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#211303 — Re: Don't disable recoomends by default

Jonas Smedegaard wrote: 
> Quoting Stephan Seitz (2019-07-12 09:30:38)
> > On Fr, Jul 12, 2019 at 09:13:29 -0300, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> > >Wrong.  Suggests are for packages useful only "sometimes", recommends
> > >are for pacakges needed in "all but unusual installations."
> > 
> > From my experience this is wrong.
> > 
> > With recommends my d10 update would have systemd as init instead of 
> > sysvinit. And I would have got (for example) the package debsecan 
> > which I don’t need.
> > 
> > So it is better to disable recommends and look at the recommended 
> > packages.
> 
> There is nothing wrong in suppressing specific recommendations where you 
> understand the implications.
> 
> What is wrong is to suppress all recommendations by default.

There's nothing wrong with suppressing all recommendations by
default, as long as you're willing to go back in and install
particular packages when you realize you want what they do.

-dsr-

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#211307 — Re: Don't disable recoomends by default

On Fri 12 Jul 2019 at 11:23:56 -0400, Dan Ritter wrote:

> Jonas Smedegaard wrote: 
> > Quoting Stephan Seitz (2019-07-12 09:30:38)
> > > On Fr, Jul 12, 2019 at 09:13:29 -0300, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> > > >Wrong.  Suggests are for packages useful only "sometimes", recommends
> > > >are for pacakges needed in "all but unusual installations."
> > > 
> > > From my experience this is wrong.
> > > 
> > > With recommends my d10 update would have systemd as init instead of 
> > > sysvinit. And I would have got (for example) the package debsecan 
> > > which I don’t need.
> > > 
> > > So it is better to disable recommends and look at the recommended 
> > > packages.
> > 
> > There is nothing wrong in suppressing specific recommendations where you 
> > understand the implications.
> > 
> > What is wrong is to suppress all recommendations by default.
> 
> There's nothing wrong with suppressing all recommendations by
> default, as long as you're willing to go back in and install
> particular packages when you realize you want what they do.

I'll go along with Jonas Smedegaard's advice. When a user knows what
he is doing, not installing Recommends: is the result of a deliberate
and considered decision. If the user makes not having recommended
packages the default on his system, I can assure you (having done it)
that realisation sometimes comes at a substantial price, especially
when more than one package is involved.

The average user loses nothing by ignoring suggestions not to install
Recommends: across the board. They will be happier with their Debian
system - and that is what we all want, eh?

-- 
Brian.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#212279 — Re: Don't disable recoomends by default

Jonas Smedegaard <jonas@jones.dk> writes:

> Quoting Stephan Seitz (2019-07-12 09:30:38)
> > On Fr, Jul 12, 2019 at 09:13:29 -0300, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> > >Wrong.  Suggests are for packages useful only "sometimes", recommends
> > >are for pacakges needed in "all but unusual installations."
> > 
> > From my experience this is wrong.
> > 
> > With recommends my d10 update would have systemd as init instead of 
> > sysvinit. And I would have got (for example) the package debsecan 
> > which I don’t need.
> > 
> > So it is better to disable recommends and look at the recommended 
> > packages.
> 
> There is nothing wrong in suppressing specific recommendations where you 
> understand the implications.
> 
> What is wrong is to suppress all recommendations by default.

I have done this for years now, i.e. I have

    APT::Install-Recommends "false";

in /etc/apt/apt.conf and I haven't had any problems, unexpected
behavior or non-functional software packages.

OTOH, IMHO many packages have recommendations I don't like, especially
if "Recommends:" means it is recommended except in unusual
installations.

For example a number of packages (e.g. geeqie) recommend cups or lpr
although it's not that unusual to not have a printer.

For some reason I don't know, nfs-common recommends python.  I have
used NFS for >25 years now, most of the time without Python and
without any problems.  And why does it recommend python (i.e. 2.7)
instead of python3?

Why does nut-client recommend bash-completion?  It's not that unusual
that admins work with ksh or zsh or some other shell only and
therefore don't need bash support.

And auctex recommends a list of PDF viewers (or okular which can show
DVI files) while I know still many users who work with xdvi only.  So
using auctex to write TeX files should not imply the user also wants
PDF or okular.

Some packages recommend specific mail readers (e.g. logrotate or
smartmontools) when they only need a MTA to send the mail.  Where the
mail is forwarded to and which MUA the admin uses to read it should be
out of the scope of those packages.  The package 'at' does it right by
only recommending mail-transport-agent.

Sometimes a package foo recommends foo-doc while others only suggest
foo-doc.

I could easily extend this list with a dozen more examples.
Installing all recommended packages would increase my installation by
a couple 100 MB, maybe GB.  And this is not only wasted disk
space but also increases the probability of security bugs, which is
bad if the specific packages is actually unused.

But even more annoying is that some packages specify Depends: on other
packages where this should not be the case, IMHO.  This is why I have
cups, bluetooth libs, bluray libs, IEEE1394 libs, MIDI libs, braille
display libs, libs for Wacom tablets, and several dozens of unused
packages on my server machine which has no audio, no bluetooth, no DVD
or Bluray drive, no braille terminal, no printer, no firewire, no
graphical display, ... nothing except a 80x25 text console, lots of
disks, and an Ethernet port.

I would like if many of these packages wouldn't link against these
libraries (and therefore depend on it) but would instead only call
dlopen(3) when the functionality in question is actually used (and
recommend or suggest those libs), and give a diagnostic message if the
lib is missing.

urs

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#212282 — Re: Don't disable recoomends by default

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Quoting Urs Thuermann (2019-08-05 17:50:17)
> Jonas Smedegaard <jonas@jones.dk> writes:
> 
> > Quoting Stephan Seitz (2019-07-12 09:30:38)
> > > On Fr, Jul 12, 2019 at 09:13:29 -0300, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> > > >Wrong.  Suggests are for packages useful only "sometimes", 
> > > >recommends are for pacakges needed in "all but unusual 
> > > >installations."
> > > 
> > > From my experience this is wrong.
> > > 
> > > With recommends my d10 update would have systemd as init instead 
> > > of sysvinit. And I would have got (for example) the package 
> > > debsecan which I don’t need.
> > > 
> > > So it is better to disable recommends and look at the recommended 
> > > packages.
> > 
> > There is nothing wrong in suppressing specific recommendations where 
> > you understand the implications.
> > 
> > What is wrong is to suppress all recommendations by default.

[ antipattern snipped ]

> OTOH, IMHO many packages have recommendations I don't like, especially 
> if "Recommends:" means it is recommended except in unusual 
> installations.

Please file bugreports!

Recommends are defined in Debian as being needed for all but exotic 
cases - so when that is not the case recommends is used wrongly.


 - Jonas

-- 
 * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
 * Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/

 [x] quote me freely  [ ] ask before reusing  [ ] keep private

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#212291 — Re: Don't disable recoomends by default

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Lu, 05 aug 19, 22:50:17, Urs Thuermann wrote:
> Jonas Smedegaard <jonas@jones.dk> writes:
> > 
> > What is wrong is to suppress all recommendations by default.
> 
> I have done this for years now, i.e. I have
> 
>     APT::Install-Recommends "false";
> 
> in /etc/apt/apt.conf and I haven't had any problems, unexpected
> behavior or non-functional software packages.
> 
> OTOH, IMHO many packages have recommendations I don't like, especially
> if "Recommends:" means it is recommended except in unusual
> installations.
> 
> For example a number of packages (e.g. geeqie) recommend cups or lpr
> although it's not that unusual to not have a printer.
 
True. It would also provide a very bad experience for those that do have 
a printer, but can't guess they need to install this peculiar package 
named "cups" to make it work.

As more printers are now available via the network (good) it's not even 
easy to autodetect the printer in the installer.

For the archives, pinning cups to -1 would nicely deal with this for 
those that really don't want cups installed.

> For some reason I don't know, nfs-common recommends python.  I have
> used NFS for >25 years now, most of the time without Python and
> without any problems.  And why does it recommend python (i.e. 2.7)
> instead of python3?

Sounds like a bug, please report.

> Why does nut-client recommend bash-completion?  It's not that unusual
> that admins work with ksh or zsh or some other shell only and
> therefore don't need bash support.

This should probably be a Suggests, even if bash is the default shell.

> And auctex recommends a list of PDF viewers (or okular which can show
> DVI files) while I know still many users who work with xdvi only.  So
> using auctex to write TeX files should not imply the user also wants
> PDF or okular.

PDF has become the de facto standard for sharing (not easily editable) 
documents. Most of the people I know (outside Debian/FLOSS) wouldn't 
even know what a dvi is.

Not generating PDFs is a rather unusual case.

The Recommends could probably be improved to use the pdf-viewer virtual 
package instead (unless the package maintainer has good reasons not to).

> Some packages recommend specific mail readers (e.g. logrotate or
> smartmontools) when they only need a MTA to send the mail.  Where the
> mail is forwarded to and which MUA the admin uses to read it should be
> out of the scope of those packages.  The package 'at' does it right by
> only recommending mail-transport-agent.

Reading the above one could think they recommend mutt, etc. when they in 
fact recommend mailx. If you worry about its installed size it really is 
an unusual system. Besides, their mail sending code might not know how 
to deal with an MTA directly.

> Sometimes a package foo recommends foo-doc while others only suggest
> foo-doc.

The Recommends would make sense on a package with a TUI/GUI able to 
display that documentation from a Help menu. Should probably be demoted 
to Suggests for most other cases.
 
> I would like if many of these packages wouldn't link against these
> libraries (and therefore depend on it) but would instead only call
> dlopen(3) when the functionality in question is actually used (and
> recommend or suggest those libs), and give a diagnostic message if the
> lib is missing.

Debian's default is to enable most (if not all) options on packages, 
which makes sense for a binary distribution.

If you require that level of selection Gentoo or Arch might be better 
suited for you.

Kind regards,
Andrei
-- 
http://wiki.debian.org/FAQsFromDebianUser

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#212304 — Re: Don't disable recoomends by default

On Tue 06 Aug 2019 at 08:41:53 +0300, Andrei POPESCU wrote:

> On Lu, 05 aug 19, 22:50:17, Urs Thuermann wrote:
> > Jonas Smedegaard <jonas@jones.dk> writes:
> > > 
> > > What is wrong is to suppress all recommendations by default.
> > 
> > I have done this for years now, i.e. I have
> > 
> >     APT::Install-Recommends "false";
> > 
> > in /etc/apt/apt.conf and I haven't had any problems, unexpected
> > behavior or non-functional software packages.
> > 
> > OTOH, IMHO many packages have recommendations I don't like, especially
> > if "Recommends:" means it is recommended except in unusual
> > installations.
> > 
> > For example a number of packages (e.g. geeqie) recommend cups or lpr
> > although it's not that unusual to not have a printer.
>  
> True. It would also provide a very bad experience for those that do have 
> a printer, but can't guess they need to install this peculiar package 
> named "cups" to make it work.

The recommended package is cups-bsd not cups, which is a different
animal. The history of why it a Recommends: is in the changelog.
The maintainer's approach to the issue seems measured to me.

-- 
Brian.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#212302 — Re: Don't disable recoomends by default

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Mon, Aug 05, 2019 at 10:50:17PM +0200, Urs Thuermann wrote:
> Jonas Smedegaard <jonas@jones.dk> writes:
> 
> > Quoting Stephan Seitz (2019-07-12 09:30:38)

[...]

> I have done this for years now, i.e. I have
> 
>     APT::Install-Recommends "false";
> 
> in /etc/apt/apt.conf and I haven't had any problems, unexpected
> behavior or non-functional software packages.

So have I. Happy camper. Of course, you've got to know what you're
doing -- at least a little.

Honestly I find the strong reactions to this ("anti-pattern", etc.)
downright disturbing. I'm in free software generally, and in Debian
particularly, because they don't try to impose things on their
users. There's far too much authoritarian software out there as
it is.

Of course, the more you delve under the hood, the more responsibility
you take for your system, but "do it like this or else" is to me
the real anti-pattern.

And now let me get down from my soapbox and hand it over to someone
else :-)

Cheers
-- t

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#212334 — Re: Don't disable recoomends by default

On Tue 06 Aug 2019 at 09:32:11 +0200, tomas@tuxteam.de wrote:

> On Mon, Aug 05, 2019 at 10:50:17PM +0200, Urs Thuermann wrote:
> > Jonas Smedegaard <jonas@jones.dk> writes:
> > 
> > > Quoting Stephan Seitz (2019-07-12 09:30:38)
> 
> [...]
> 
> > I have done this for years now, i.e. I have
> > 
> >     APT::Install-Recommends "false";
> > 
> > in /etc/apt/apt.conf and I haven't had any problems, unexpected
> > behavior or non-functional software packages.
> 
> So have I. Happy camper. Of course, you've got to know what you're
> doing -- at least a little.

That makes three of us. We can handle the fallout (if any). But the
last thing we want is to deprive many users of a smooth experience
of Debian.

> Honestly I find the strong reactions to this ("anti-pattern", etc.)
> downright disturbing. I'm in free software generally, and in Debian
> particularly, because they don't try to impose things on their
> users. There's far too much authoritarian software out there as
> it is.
> 
> Of course, the more you delve under the hood, the more responsibility
> you take for your system, but "do it like this or else" is to me
> the real anti-pattern.

Most users rarely delve under the hood in regards to Recommends:; it
is a non-issue for them. We have the best of both worlds as it stands
at present.

> And now let me get down from my soapbox and hand it over to someone
> else :-)

We'd rather you stayed there to keep us up to the mark. Anyway, we
like the snazzy shirt you are wearing.

-- 
Brian.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#212351 — Re: Don't disable recoomends by default

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Tue, Aug 06, 2019 at 07:40:25PM +0100, Brian wrote:
> On Tue 06 Aug 2019 at 09:32:11 +0200, tomas@tuxteam.de wrote:

[...]

> > And now let me get down from my soapbox and hand it over to someone
> > else :-)
> 
> We'd rather you stayed there to keep us up to the mark. Anyway, we
> like the snazzy shirt you are wearing.

Oops! And I thought I had my webcam covered?

;-)

Cheers
-- t

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#212306 — Re: Don't disable recoomends by default

On Mon 05 Aug 2019 at 22:50:17 +0200, Urs Thuermann wrote:

> For some reason I don't know, nfs-common recommends python.  I have

Digging in the changelog gives you that.

    Add Recommends python for mountstats and nfsiostat

-- 
Brian.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#212308 — Re: Don't disable recoomends by default

On Mon 05 Aug 2019 at 22:50:17 +0200, Urs Thuermann wrote:

> Sometimes a package foo recommends foo-doc while others only suggest
> foo-doc.

>From https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-docs.html:

  If package is a build tool, development tool, command-line tool,
  or library development package, package (or package-dev in the
  case of a library development package) already provides
  documentation in man, info, or plain text format, and package-doc
  provides HTML or other formats, package should declare at most a
  Suggests on package-doc. Otherwise, package should declare at most
  a Recommends on package-doc.

What's the problem?

-- 
Brian.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#212330 — Re: Don't disable recoomends by default

On Mon 05 Aug 2019 at 22:50:17 +0200, Urs Thuermann wrote:

> Why does nut-client recommend bash-completion?  It's not that unusual
> that admins work with ksh or zsh or some other shell only and
> therefore don't need bash support.

bash-completion has been recommended since 2009. Not a single bug
report since then. That should tell you something. Maybe the admins
who work other shells get the intention.

-- 
Brian.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#212337 — Re: Don't disable recoomends by default

On Mon 05 Aug 2019 at 22:50:17 +0200, Urs Thuermann wrote:

> And auctex recommends a list of PDF viewers (or okular which can show
> DVI files) while I know still many users who work with xdvi only.  So
> using auctex to write TeX files should not imply the user also wants
> PDF or okular.

Those users can use ignore the Recommends: and use only xdvi if they
wish. Where is the problem?

It strikes me that your argument is based solely on "many packages
have recommendations I don't like". I am glad you are not in charge.

-- 
Brian.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.user

csiph-web