Bug#681136: Should libavcodec-extra-53 Provides: libavcodec53? [Was: Re: Bug#681136: libavcodec-extra-53: Cannot install libavcodec-extra-53 without losing kde]
Am 12.07.2012 11:15, schrieb Reinhard Tartler: That would make 'libavcodec53' a virtual package, which AFAIUI would break versioned dependencies as dpkg does not support versioned provides. This doesn't sound like a problem as long as both binary packages are built from the same sources, e.g. the gnuplot package family does the same (gnuplot-qt Provides: gnuplot-x11 Provides: gnuplot-nox). - Fabian ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Bug#681136: Should libavcodec-extra-53 Provides: libavcodec53? [Was: Re: Bug#681136: libavcodec-extra-53: Cannot install libavcodec-extra-53 without losing kde]
On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 9:14 AM, Fabian Greffrath fab...@greffrath.com wrote: Am 12.07.2012 11:15, schrieb Reinhard Tartler: That would make 'libavcodec53' a virtual package, which AFAIUI would break versioned dependencies as dpkg does not support versioned provides. This doesn't sound like a problem as long as both binary packages are built from the same sources, e.g. the gnuplot package family does the same (gnuplot-qt Provides: gnuplot-x11 Provides: gnuplot-nox). Well, it will be a problem for all application packages that link against libavcodec, as it would effectively break the shlibs system. -- regards, Reinhard ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Bug#681136: Should libavcodec-extra-53 Provides: libavcodec53? [Was: Re: Bug#681136: libavcodec-extra-53: Cannot install libavcodec-extra-53 without losing kde]
On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 10:07 PM, Fabian Greffrath fab...@greffrath.com wrote: The problem appears to have been that I had not succeeded in removing all Marillat's packages, despite trying to make sure I had before reporting I suspected this. :) After reinstalling all the vlc (and xine) related packages I was able to install libavcodec-extra-53. At least. I still think it would have been easier if libavcodec-extra-53 had either Provides: libavcodec53 or, even better, really was just extras without I don't see any reason against this approach but leave it up for discussion with the other team members (then this big should get closed). That would make 'libavcodec53' a virtual package, which AFAIUI would break versioned dependencies as dpkg does not support versioned provides. replacing libavcodec53 at all. However, I am sure you have good reasons for this packaging. Unfortunately, it is not possible to package the extra parts alone, so both libraries need to replace each other. It would require invasive modifications to libavcodec to load all libraries that are only included in the -extra- variations at run-time via dlopen(). It seems to me that this approach has a number of corner cases to figure out (most importantly: at what time can libavcodec decide if a codec is available or not - moreover dlopen() is not available on all platforms that libav supports), and is therefore not really a favored approach by upstream. -- regards, Reinhard ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Bug#681136: Should libavcodec-extra-53 Provides: libavcodec53? [Was: Re: Bug#681136: libavcodec-extra-53: Cannot install libavcodec-extra-53 without losing kde]
The problem appears to have been that I had not succeeded in removing all Marillat's packages, despite trying to make sure I had before reporting I suspected this. :) After reinstalling all the vlc (and xine) related packages I was able to install libavcodec-extra-53. At least. I still think it would have been easier if libavcodec-extra-53 had either Provides: libavcodec53 or, even better, really was just extras without I don't see any reason against this approach but leave it up for discussion with the other team members (then this big should get closed). replacing libavcodec53 at all. However, I am sure you have good reasons for this packaging. Unfortunately, it is not possible to package the extra parts alone, so both libraries need to replace each other. - Fabian ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
