Hi Rich,

And what I'm really asking for here is for somebody to actually
explain what is actually wrong with dynamic dependencies. I have seen
47 almost-certainly-sincere claims that they're broken, but little in
the way of examples, and the one that has been given (prerm) seems

Are you saying you agree that the prerm example is a valid one, except for:

likely to break with static deps the way it is implemented today (we
don't unmerge reverse-deps before upgrading the dep, which breaks
linking that might be required to unmerge the package in the first
place - though it probably only breaks 0.01% of the time and the cure
is likely worse than the disease).

I got lost here. Are you invalidating the example or is this a more meta invalidating your invalidation?

Surely a 99.9% valid example is pretty valid, or did I misinterpret?

Cheers,

Seemant