On Sat, Oct 14, 2006 at 02:50:07AM +0200, Julien Cristau wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 13, 2006 at 15:36:36 -0400, X Strike Force SVN Repository Admin
> wrote:
>
> > Modified: trunk/xserver/xorg-server/debian/control
> > ===================================================================
> > --- trunk/xserver/xorg-server/debian/control 2006-10-13 19:26:23 UTC
> > (rev 3751)
> > +++ trunk/xserver/xorg-server/debian/control 2006-10-13 19:36:36 UTC
> > (rev 3752)
> > @@ -13,7 +13,7 @@
> >
> > Package: xserver-xorg-core
> > Architecture: any
> > -Depends: x11-common (>= 1:7.0.0), ${shlibs:Depends}, ${misc:Depends}
> > +Depends: x11-common (>= 1:7.0.0), ${shlibs:Depends}, ${misc:Depends},
> > xserver-xorg
> > Recommends: xkb-data
> > Conflicts: xserver-xorg (<< 6.8.2-38), xserver-xfree86 (<< 1:7.0.0),
> > xserver-xorg-video
> > Replaces: xserver-xorg (<< 6.8.2-38), xserver-xfree86 (<< 1:7.0.0)
> >
> This adds a circular dependency between xserver-xorg and
> xserver-xorg-core. I don't know if this can cause problems, and I don't
> know if it's avoidable, but it looks a bit like a hack...
> I'm not sure anyone will be installing xserver-xorg-core without
> xserver-xorg, and even less sure that it should really be supported.
Yeah, I know. I know that circular depends can cause problems, but from
various people who are more knowledgeable about these things than me (like
the dpkg author) saying that they aren't really a problem, I think we
should let this slide seeing as xserver-xorg and xserver-xorg-core really
do depend on each other. We could move the /etc/X11/X symlink creation to
-core as well as a better solution.
- David Nusinow
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
