On Friday, June 14, 2024 10:25:59 AM CEST John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote: > I'm not denying that. However, a package named "qml6-module-qtquick-effects" > doesn't sound like an interpreter to me. > > Thus, I don't really see how I am supposed to know as a maintainer what > packages add Depends except for trial and error. Why not have one canonical > "qt-interpretor" package or similar that applications can depend on?
This is a module for a interpreted language. It is not much different than a python package might need a hardcoded dependency on python-foo if it uses that. or a perl package might need a hardcoded dependency on libperl-foo-bar- baz if it uses the Foo::Bar::Baz perl module for important functionality. all qml*-module packages are qml (interpreted language) extensions. And yes. trial and error - or reading the sources - is for many interpreted languages the only way of figuring it out. /Sune -- I didn’t stop pretending when I became an adult, it’s just that when I was a kid I was pretending that I fit into the rules and structures of this world. And now that I’m an adult, I pretend that those rules and structures exist. - zefrank
