Re: unsolvable circular dependencies and package splitting
Steve Langasek writes: Huh? The bottom of that bug log shows a proposed solution that should work just fine. Ok, that's not quite how I read it. The discussion ended with an idea for a fix and invitation to make such a package. That package never materialized, so I assumed there must be more to it. There shouldn't be any cases that are unsolvable AFAICT. Great, that would mean that there is no need for such an exception. Jan. -- Jan Nieuwenhuizen [EMAIL PROTECTED] | GNU LilyPond - The music typesetter http://www.xs4all.nl/~jantien | http://www.lilypond.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
unsolvable circular dependencies and package splitting
I wanted to report a circular dependency bug in fontconfig, but found the discussion http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=%23310877%3A with apparent outcome: the fontconfig -libfontconfig1 dependency cannot be resolved. If a circular dependency cannot be resolved because both packages always need eachother, would policy not mandate that both packages be merged? Or maybe policy should be updated to allow circular dependencies in cases that they are `unsolvable', and list those cases? Jan. -- Jan Nieuwenhuizen [EMAIL PROTECTED] | GNU LilyPond - The music typesetter http://www.xs4all.nl/~jantien | http://www.lilypond.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: unsolvable circular dependencies and package splitting
On Mon, Jan 09, 2006 at 11:21:28AM +0100, Jan Nieuwenhuizen wrote: I wanted to report a circular dependency bug in fontconfig, but found the discussion http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=%23310877%3A with apparent outcome: the fontconfig -libfontconfig1 dependency cannot be resolved. Huh? The bottom of that bug log shows a proposed solution that should work just fine. If a circular dependency cannot be resolved because both packages always need eachother, would policy not mandate that both packages be merged? Shipping files in /usr/bin as part of a lib package causes problems for coinstallability when there's an soname change. Even if you could guarantee forwards-compatibility of interfaces, and as a result ship /usr/bin/fc-cache in each lib package with Replaces:, there's the possibility you might remove a later version of the lib and take the config files with it... Or maybe policy should be updated to allow circular dependencies in cases that they are `unsolvable', and list those cases? There shouldn't be any cases that are unsolvable AFAICT. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/ signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: unsolvable circular dependencies and package splitting
* Steve Langasek | Shipping files in /usr/bin as part of a lib package causes problems for | coinstallability when there's an soname change. Even if you could guarantee | forwards-compatibility of interfaces, and as a result ship /usr/bin/fc-cache | in each lib package with Replaces:, there's the possibility you might remove | a later version of the lib and take the config files with it... That will also get you into an «interesting» situation with multiarch paths. -- Tollef Fog Heen,''`. UNIX is user friendly, it's just picky about who its friends are : :' : `. `' `-
