On Sun, 2 Dec 2007 15:23:57 -0600 "Aaron Griffin" <aaronmgriffin@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I still can't understand why this is a problem though... according to > pacman, the installed size is 12K, and the only possible reason I > could think of for caring about this dep is size.... could you please > explain the rationale here? I understand Michael's point, I think. He's not talking about the aufs package at all, but using it as an example for the rule in the Packaging Guidlines that says modules should always depend on their utilities, even when you can use the modules without them. He wasn't complaining about not getting things exaclty as he wants them, he was only asking a curious question. He wants to know the reason for this exception to the rule of packages only depending on what the package needs to be useful. To me it seems your answer is: We don't have a reason, and stop bothering us with stupid questions. Or is it; it's ok with deps that are not necessary as long as they're small? Although it's a bit pedantic, I think he has a point too. If you should follow this principle all the way, the kernel26 package should depend on cryptsetup, nfs-utils, dosfsutils, fuse, iptables, ntfsprogs etc., you get my idea..
