Am Dienstag, den 07.07.2015, 11:10 +0000 schrieb Jack Underwood: > As far as I understand, a virtual package acts as a placeholder for > dependencies whereby the user can substitute any package marked as > meeting that dependency, for an example look at the www-browser package. > In terms of musescore, I presume we want to say "musescore depends > on having at least one compatible soundfont installed". Thus it feels > like we should make musescore-soundfont-gm a virtual package as many > soundfonts fill that role, and keep it as a dependency.
In general, yes. Though, you do not simply turn an existing binary package into a virtual package, so I guess you mean a meta-package here (which it pretty much already is). And in the specific case of musescore, there are only two packages in Debian that come into question, so a simple "Depends: a | b" would already suffice. To introduce a virtual package, you would have to re-upload all providing packages with a "Provides: foo" stanza, etc. But I am getting off-topic now. > That said, as you say musescore2 already contains a bundled soundfont, > thus it doesn't at the moment require a soundfont as a dependency. If in > the future you decide to package the bundled soundfont separately then I > think we need to make this package virtual for the reasons stated above. > Until then you should make musescore-soundfont-gm a suggested package of > musescore instead of a dependency. Agreed. In fact, since this actually keeps musescore from entering testing, I am tempted to raise the bug severity to "serious". @musescore maintainers, are you at it or should I upload a fixed package? Cheers, Fabian
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
