On Tue, 2002-07-16 at 16:19, Lamar Owen wrote:
> So you do:
> Requires: smtpdaemon
> and be done with it.
This is bordering on offtopic, but "smtpdaemon" does not cover all
aspects of the /usr/sbin/sendmail. E.g. I might not need an smtp daemon,
but I need local delivery -- requiring smtpdaemon is a misnomer in this
case.
> If alternative packages provide a common pseudo-package such as smtpdaemon,
> then you don't need file dependencies. However, explicit provides of names
> that appear to be files may not be a problem, either.
>
> The 'smptdaemon' example above is what I have been calling 'package'
> dependencies -- that may or may not be canonically correct terminology.
Wouldn't that be creating MORE complexity, vs. LESS complexity?
Regards,
--
0> Konstantin ("Icon") Riabitsev
/ ) Duke University Physics Sysadmin
~ www.phy.duke.edu/~icon/pubkey.asc
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part