Re: suggests/requires in rpm

[Jeff Johnson <n3npq nc rr com>]

seth vidal wrote:

> > I, for one, thought Jeff was clear that it's the job of depsolvers 
> > (anaconda, yum, smart, apt) to decide what to do with the extra 
> > information.
> >    
>
> All that's really been done is to push the decision-making process off
> on the depsolvers.
>
> It hasn't resolved the problem, just resolved the problem for rpm.
>  

Au contraire.

Change no yum code, i.e. don't look at the RPMSENSE_MISSINGOK bit, and 
you have exactly
the existing behavior.

Meanwhile, rpm -e becomes possible for end-users, albeit at the expense 
of flip-flop through anaconda.

That appears to be progress forward.

OTOH -- without an RFE in bugzilla -- I shall not waste 3 hours on an 
implementation, and so no problem
whatsoever has been, or will be, resolved.

Criminey, how hard is it to check a bit that marks an edge in a graph 
"optional"? You'ld think this
was NPTL or SELinux.

73 de Jeff