Re: Getting rid of circular dependencies, stage 4
On Wed, May 10, 2006 at 01:41:56PM -0400, Hubert Chan wrote:
> On Wed, 10 May 2006 09:04:14 -0400, James Vega <firstname.lastname@example.org> said:
> > On Wed, May 10, 2006 at 12:32:53AM -0400, Hubert Chan wrote:
> >> Hmm... alsaplayer-common Depends: on "alsaplayer-alsa |
> >> alsaplayer-output" and "alsaplayer-gtk | alsaplayer-interface". Is
> >> this really a problem?
> My question, which I guess wasn't clear, was whether the circular
> dependency is still a problem if one of the dependencies in the cycle is
> an or'ed dependency.
Yes it is. Consider the following set of packages:
A -> B|C
B -> A
C -> nothing
1) A user can request A and B to be installed. This fulfill the
dependency. requirement. However dpkg cannot configure A before B and B
2) Such user upgrade to Etch. dpkg must upgrade A and B. It will not
replace B by C to remove the cycle and it still cannot configure A
before B and B before A.
So the problem exist as soon as there exists a choice of the
alternatives that lead to a circular dependency.
Imagine a large red swirl here.