On Wed, 2014-11-05 at 10:26 +0100, Michal Kubecek wrote:
My point exactly.
Bottom line: When packaging software for a distribution that does not support weak RPM dependencies, the usual way is "Requires: foo".
And this is where we differ. In general, I believe, users should not be punished for learning more and understanding how things work. Feeling something is broken while just a package is missing is something that can be helped with user learning more; having to break invalid strong dependencies can't. And seeing distribution making your life hard only to make life of uninformed users tiny bit easier is really frustrating.
I would classify this as a perfect way to send inexperienced, new users away. Why? well: if I take distroy xyz, feature abc just works. only on openSUSE it is broken, because they don't get the dependencies are right. Of course, we don't REALLY have the problem on openSUSE anymore, because we DO know weak deps.. but any packager providing stuff for dists without weak deps is responsible for HIMSELF to decide what features he wants to force on the user (just as the packager is also making a good set of assumptions with various configure switches). IF you want to have control over those too maybe look at Gentoo or LFS. A pre-packaged system is likely not the right thing for the explicit flexibility and full control you require at this stage anymore. So, getting back to the original topic of this thread and an answer to the actual question (which was also given by Adrian): failing the build on a dist that does not know weak deps is the only sensible way to handle this. The packager is responsible to make the right decision. He's the only one. Cheers, Dominique -- Dimstar / Dominique Leuenberger <dimstar@opensuse.org> -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org