On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 06:01, Pierre Chapuis <catwell@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Le Sun, 14 Dec 2008 10:03:03 +0200, > "Grigorios Bouzakis" <grbzks@xxxxxxxxx> a écrit : > >> May i ask why pacman requires pacman-mirrorlist and not the other way >> around? Pacman can operate without a mirrorlist. Pacman-mirrorlist can >> not operate without pacman.. > > Agreed, but I think a lot of users would forget to install if it weren't a dep. of pacman. Maybe pacman should be renamed something like pacman-core and both of them added to a "pacman" group? I really dislike this idea a lot. I think it's fine either way with depends really. Having the mirrorlist depend on pacman may be more correct, but it would confuse some people, so it's a tossup IMO.
