On 15.5.2012 07:52, Niels Thykier wrote:
On 2012-05-15 06:38, tony mancill wrote:
On 05/14/2012 08:18 AM, Jakub Adam wrote:
In my opinion libswt-gtk-3.5-java and libswt-3-gtk-java are not in
conflict,
generally it's ok to have them installed both. The problem is in tuxguitar
package itself which will not work with SWT 3.5.
So I suggest that we make tuxguitar to conflict with libswt-gtk-3.5-java
(and maybe also with libswt-gtk-3.4-java and libswt-gtk-3.6-java I see
in Grant's package list too).
Hi Jakub,
There are times in the past when tuxguitar explicitly depended on
libswt-gtk-3.5-jar, so it seems odd to say that tuxguitar won't work
with it. What seems to be the case is that tuxguitar won't work when
both -3.5 and -3 packages are install.
Sorry, I was wrong with my statement. I thought libswt-cairo-gtk-3555.so
was for some reason not built in swt-gtk 3.5, but I missed it is packaged
separately in libswt-cairo-gtk-3.5-jni.
I believe that swt uses alternatives for the swt.jar, so if you have an
older version of libswt-*-java providing the alternative without (all)
the relevant -jni package => "boom". Now that should not be possible to
do, but it is...
"""
un libswt-gnome-gtk-3.5-jni<none> [...]
un libswt-gnome-gtk-3.6-jni<none> [...]
[...]
ii libswt-gtk-3.5-java 3.5.1-5 [...]
ii libswt-gtk-3.6-java 3.6.2-1 [...]
"""
Presumably the dependency relations on the old -jni packages (or on the
old -java packages) are not strong enough.
I'd like to note that even the most recent libswt-gtk-3-java doesn't have a
strong dependency on all its -jni packages. For example libswt-cairo-gtk-3-jni
is neither a dependency nor a suggestion in any other package created from
swt-gtk (except -gcj which is not relevant in this case I suppose). If it was
meant to be changed in the past, presumably it wasn't done.
I don't think this is something wrong, as it allows to install only what is
really needed, as long as applications list all the -jni packages they require.
Tuxguitar does this, but only for libswt-gtk-3-java and doesn't expect that
any alternative can be present, therefore it may crash.
So I think we would have to change its Depends to something like:
Depends: libswt-gtk-3-java | libswt-gtk-3.5-java,
libswt-cairo-gtk-3-jni | libswt-cairo-gtk-3.5-jni,
... etc
... or get rid of the alternatives.
Personally, I think the swt alternatives is... "weird" at best. So I
would vote for breaking the old packages to force their removal and then
remove the usage of alternatives in Wheezy+1.
I support this
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
