Re: question about optional dependencies

Hi Lukas and all, We all know the BC stuff is unlikely to be "worked out" perfectly, so this will remain an issue as long as the "le," "ne" and "lt" operators exist. I will require a --force (essentially a fatal error, since --force will skip the code that causes it) Greg Lukas Smith wrote:

From: Greg Beaver [mailto:greg@chiaraquartet.net] Sent: Friday, October 31, 2003 11:10 PM

My question is, should installation be prevented if an optional dependency is not satisfied with a package that is already installed? In other words, Foo will probably be broken if it attempts to use Bar as part of the optional features, should the installer prevent installation of Foo without --force? This question has particular relevance to questions of BC.

I think the installation should require a "force". The thing is we don't know if he is actually using the optional dependency. I think making it possible to register if you are using the optional dependency or not is overkill however. So I think we should just warn him. Then he can evaluate the choice and force the upgrade if needed. If we ever get the BC stuff worked out this will become pretty much a no issue anyways. Or so goes the theory. Regards, Lukas