* Julien Lavergne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-06-03 22:43:44 CEST]: > Hi, > > > The package only losely suggests compiz, and even there not as its > > primary preference: > > > > Suggests: metacity (>= 2.21.5) | xcompmgr | compiz | xfwm4 (>= 4.2) > > > > Though, trying to start avant-window-navigator gives this message: > > > > #v+ > > Error: Screen isn't composited. Please run compiz (-fusion) or another > > compositing manager. > > #v- > > As Andrew said, to work, avant-window-navigator need a composite > manager which run with it. So if you install compiz for example, > avant-window-manager will not work automatically, but only if you run > compiz.
Then please add documentation on how to accomplish that and reference it in the message that you display when it's run without a composite enabled manager. > When I packaged another application which needed composite manager, my > sponsor told me to set it as a suggest to not create a hard depends on > compiz (some people want a composite manager but not compiz). But the package /does/ have a hard dependency on a compositing manager. Please note the difference between any compositing manager and compiz itself - there is no need for the latter, but there is in fact a need for the former. The way it's done in the suggests doesn't create any hard depends on compiz but on a compositing manager. > The order of the suggested packages was made like this : > - metacity because there is a composite manager, yes not enable by > default but working quite well. It's also the package which installed > less depends on the system. Please add documentation on how to enable it so people are aware on how to get it working with it. > - xcompmgr also because there is not many depends. > - compiz because you need to set it properly (drivers, launch on > start...) and you don't need all the effects. If you need any special configuration to make it work, pretty please add documentation on that, too. > - xfwm4 because it's a composite manager, but you need to install xfce > depends. Are these depends completely fulfilled by installing xfwm4? If not then the alternative chain doesn't seem to be complete. At least, please also document it. > I can also add kwin4 in this list. If it would work, it would be a good idea. The list should be as complete as possible - but my original report still holds: avant-window-navigator doesn't work without any composite manager but doesn't depend on any, only suggest them. > I'm agree that it should be better if I mention that in a > README.debian. But I'm not convinced that put it as Depends will have > a better impact, because there is still a manual action for the user. But the program /does/ depend on a composite manager. It doesn't work without any, is useless without any. Yes, that it requires additional configuration to enable it finally propably should also get addressed - maybe through some debconf note hinting the users in the correct direction, or explicitly stating so in the package description. But it doesn't mean that users should go and install something else once they found out what's going on and why it's not working, that something else should already be on the system. That's what Dependencies are there for. So long, Rhonda -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
