Hi folks,
How to deal with a desktop-command-not-in-package lintian warning when a
.desktop file in a "common" package B references a binary in package A ?
Typically the package A used to contain static/arch-independent data
which was splitted to a B "common" package to comply with debian
pa
Am Sonntag, den 10.01.2010, 14:30 +0100 schrieb Xavier Roche:
> Hi folks,
>
> How to deal with a desktop-command-not-in-package lintian warning when a
> .desktop file in a "common" package B references a binary in package A ?
>
> Typically the package A used to contain static/arch-independent da
On Sun, Jan 10, 2010 at 03:15:30PM +0100, Benjamin Drung wrote:
> Am Sonntag, den 10.01.2010, 14:30 +0100 schrieb Xavier Roche:
> > Hi folks,
> >
> > How to deal with a desktop-command-not-in-package lintian warning when a
> > .desktop file in a "common" package B references a binary in package A
Hi Ralf ,
Ralf Treinen a écrit :
For me solution 1 is also justified when putting the .desktop file into
the arch-dependent package. Since the arch-dependent package depends
on the common package lintian shouldn't complain
Well, at first glance I wanted to make the two packages cross-dependend
On Sun, Jan 10, 2010 at 03:47:39PM +0100, Xavier Roche wrote:
> Ralf Treinen a écrit :
> >True, but this is really an exceptional case. I suspect the normal case is
> >that one installs both packages.
>
> Yep, exactly. OTOH, I will just move the small desktop file in the
> arch-dependent one, whic
On Sun, Jan 10, 2010 at 15:47:39 +0100, Xavier Roche wrote:
> The only consequence is a typical conflict when installing the new
> package because a file was moved from a package to another one, with
> dependency issues (something I already experienced):
>
> installed:package A
> installed:packag
Julien Cristau a écrit :
No. You don't need any conflicts, you need
Replaces: B (<< new)
in the new A and upgrades will work just fine.
Yes, works fine, thanks! One more lintian warning removed :)
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscrib
Ralf Treinen writes:
> For me solution 1 is also justified when putting the .desktop file into
> the arch-dependent package. Since the arch-dependent package depends on
> the common package lintian shouldn't complain, otherwise a bug report
> against lintian might be in order.
I think it's mildl
8 matches
Mail list logo
