[wpkg-users] Strict depend/chain checks or conflicts on 1.3.1?

[Rainer Meier]

Hi Marco,

On 23.06.2014 12:12, Marco Gaiarin wrote:
> Probably i've used 'chain' for some (old?) WPKG behaviour, but i
> rememeber well a past discussion on that topic that lead on 'better use
> chain that include for that'.
> Also, probably 'that' was not libreoffice. ;-)

Well, 'include' is again another thing. There are 3 types of "inclusions" as 
written on the wiki page. Only 'depends' will really define a hard dependency. 
Chaining will ensure a certain order on initial installation and include will 
just drag another package into the profile.


> and considering that there's no strict ''dependencies'' between LO and
> the help package, the better approach seems also to me using 'include',
> eventually playing a bit with priority to force a package install
> before/after the other (as you done).

I would rather say there IS actually a strict dependency between LO and the hep 
package as the installation of the help package will likely fail without LO 
being installed.

So in fact the help package depends on LO.

However I think there isn't much use of specifying the help package as a chain 
in the LO main package since different machines/profiles should perhaps get 
different help languages assigned.
Also it's fully legitimate just to deploy plain LO package without any 
language-specific help package.

I would personally define a hard dependency to the LO main package within the 
language packages and just call it 'libreoffice-<lang>'. Then only assign 
'libreofice-<lang>' to the profile depending on machine needs. Optionally also 
the LO base package can be assigned to the host but due to strict dependency it 
would be sufficient to assign the language-specific package only.

br,
Rainer