On 04.09.09 Christophe Mutricy (xto...@chewa.net) wrote: > Le Fri 04 Sep 09 à 19:05 +0200, Hilmar Preusse a écrit : > > On 04.09.09 Reimar Döffinger (reimar.doeffin...@gmx.de) wrote: > > > On Fri, Sep 04, 2009 at 12:19:28PM +0200, Hilmar Preusse wrote:
Hi, > > > > your package actually depends on the dummy package libsdl1.2debian. > > > > Please > > > > link with one of the other packages provided by the source package: > > > >[...] > > > Uh, why? The libsdl1.2debian package is exactly the right one, > > > since any of the above are ok. > > > > > The package you link against is a dummy package: > > [...] > > Linking against it doesn't make any sense. I guess the next rebuild > > will change the dep anyway. Further discussions regarding this should > > be addressed to the SDL maintainers. > > > We don't link to a package. We depend on it. And we don't depend on > the dummy one to let the user choose which of the libsdl1.2debian-* > he wants to use according to the sound system he use. > I'm sorry, I didn't use the right wording: linking against a package not having any usable data (except changelog etc.) is not possible. So mplayer depends on a dummy package. > Furthermore, we don't force on what package we depends. It's all > comes from the .shlibs file of libsdl1.2-debian. Which, IMHO, > correctly has libsdl1.2debian in it. > On my system libsdl1.2-debian does not provide a shlibs file: hi...@sid:~ $ ls -l /var/lib/dpkg/info/libsdl1.2debian*shlibs -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 97 2009-03-12 02:05 /var/lib/dpkg/info/libsdl1.2debian-alsa.shlibs This file has the following content: hi...@sid:~ $ more /var/lib/dpkg/info/libsdl1.2debian-alsa.shlibs libSDL-1.2 0 libsdl1.2debian (>= 1.2.10-1) udeb: libSDL-1.2 0 libsdl1.2debian-udeb (>= 1.2.10-1) Not yure, how to interpret this content. > So I think it's not a bug and an mplayer Uploader should close it. IF > some people can demonstrate it's a bug, then it's a libsdl bug and not a > mplayer bug. > I still think it is a bug, but I am not sure in which package. - mplayer depends on a package not containing any usable data - that package depends on either: * libsdl1.2debian-alsa, * libsdl1.2debian-all, * libsdl1.2debian-esd, * libsdl1.2debian-arts, * libsdl1.2debian-oss, * libsdl1.2debian-nas or * libsdl1.2debian-pulseaudio So I guess mplayer should declare the same deps. I have libsdl1.2debian-alsa on my system, but can't remove the dummy package. sid:~# dpkg -l libsdl1.2debian-alsa Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge/Hold |Status=Not/Inst/Cfg-files/Unpacked/Failed-cfg/Half-inst/trig-aWait/Trig-pend |/ Err?=(none)/Hold/Reinst-required/X=both-problems (Status,Err:uppercase=bad) ||/ Name Version Description +++-==============-==============-============================================ ii libsdl1.2debia 1.2.13-4+b1 Simple DirectMedia Layer (with X11 and ALSA sid:~# apt-get --purge remove libsdl1.2debian Reading package lists... Done Building dependency tree Reading state information... Done The following packages will be REMOVED: libsdl1.2debian* mplayer* 0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 2 to remove and 0 not upgraded. After this operation, 6,296kB disk space will be freed. Do you want to continue [Y/n]? n Abort. As said: I'me not sure if libsdl1.2-dev creates the wrong dep line for mplayer or if this is a bug in mplayer. I suggest to clarify this with the SDL maintainers. Many thanks, Hilmar -- sigmentation fault -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
