Re: More package questions

On Wed, May 06, 1998 at 05:25:09PM +0200, Hrvoje Niksic wrote: > Olivier Galibert <galibert(a)pobox.com&gt; writes: > > In *this* case what we have to fix is the dependency. We should have a > > "dependency overrride" flag, but *not* set it by default. > > Or, maybe we should do what Debian does, which is distinguish between > "suggesting" a package and "requiring" it. When package A requires > package B, it means it will be useless without it. OTOH, when package > A suggests package B, it means that it will run without it, but (say) > with less features.

This would be nice, too. And does not preclude the flag existence, which is a necessity (un-overridable package systems simply aren't usable). Steve, can this "suggest/require" distinction fit nicely in what you have ?