Jonathan Nieder writes:
> (dropped cc's; hopefully that's okay.)
> Hi!
>
> Luca Capello wrote:
>
>> I see these situations as a misuse of Depends: where Recommends: would
>> be perfectly fine, otherwise Recommends: are useless. But given that it
>> seems no one agrees with me, is such a behavior
Simon McVittie writes:
> For instance, openarena needs a corresponding version of openarena-data:
> if you substitute a data-set in the same format (zipped Quake III-compatible
> assets) with non-trivial modifications, it won't be network-compatible, and
> might even crash if you don't make corre
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 05:18:00PM +0100, Luca Capello wrote:
> Given that I found this problem for the second time in the last 4
> months, I think this is worth a discussion on debian-devel@.
I agree.
> It seems that recently two library packages started to change their
> Recommends: to common d
Simon McVittie wrote:
> Or are you saying
> that things with special::auto-inst-parts should never have even a weakened
> dependency on the package of which they're an implementation detail?
Yes. (Well, a Suggests is okay.)
> In situations where the data and the engine have a many-to-many relat
On Mon, 21 Mar 2011 at 12:10:16 -0500, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> Simon McVittie wrote:
> > The existence of openarena-data is an implementation detail of openarena,
> > so it has this relationship:
> >
> >/--->--- Depends -->---\
> > openarena openarena-data
> >\---<--
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 5:42 PM, Simon McVittie wrote:
> The data package typically just takes up space without doing anything
> useful if you install it on its own, so it should have the
> special::auto-inst-parts debtag and should usually Recommend the library or
> executable.
I don't agree. Ye
Hi,
Simon McVittie wrote:
> Which way to break the circular dependency needs to be considered
> case-by-case;
> neither answer is universally right.
Here (with this statement of the problem) I disagree --- using Depends to
mean Enhances is _always_ wrong.
For example:
> The existence of opena
(dropped cc's; hopefully that's okay.)
Hi!
Luca Capello wrote:
> I see these situations as a misuse of Depends: where Recommends: would
> be perfectly fine, otherwise Recommends: are useless. But given that it
> seems no one agrees with me, is such a behavior documented somewhere?
Checking poli
On Mon, 21 Mar 2011 at 17:18:00 +0100, Luca Capello wrote:
> When I found out about libm17n-0, I also found out that the change added
> a circular dependency and thus commented on this new bug why I think a
> library package should not depend on data packages
Which way to break the circular depend
Hi there!
Given that I found this problem for the second time in the last 4
months, I think this is worth a discussion on debian-devel@.
It seems that recently two library packages started to change their
Recommends: to common data to a Depends:. This after two bugs were
reported by the same per
10 matches
Mail list logo
