Re: Bug#273734: education-common: con't fulfill the Recommends on !i386
On Sun, Oct 03, 2004 at 03:40:28AM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> A package in non-free is definitely not worse than no package at
> all [1].
Indeed.
> The only reasonable purpose of this part of policy seems to be to
> enforce that all Depends and Recommends are fulfillable inside main.
Yes, I read it that way, too.
> Someone might have a different reading of the text of your policy than I
> have, but independent of the policy text it simply doesn't make any
> sense that removing a package from non-free would make a Recommends of
> it correct [2].
I agree.
But let's not forget that we talk about at least three different issues
here:
1) A package recommends another one that is not available, at least not
in his release (or release candidate). I think we all agree that this
is a serious bug.
2) A package (Arch: any) recommends a package that is available on some
of its arches, but not on all. I think this is a serious bug, too, as
it can be worked around easily (like my patch does for bcc).
3) A package (Arch: all) recommends a package that is available on
some of the Debian arches but not on all. Here the question is if a
package should be forced to become Arch: any, because of this
relation-ship. I'm currently more in favour of leaving this descision
up to the maintainer, and don't see it as a serious bug (although it is
a bug).
Gruesse,
--
Frank Lichtenheld <djpig@debian.org>
www: http://www.djpig.de/
Reply to: