Re: Proposal for Provides:
On Wed, Oct 13, 1999 at 02:47:26AM +0200, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> Previously Tomasz Wêgrzanowski wrote:
> > I suggest there should be
> > Provides-Corporeal (real files of other package, mostly lib, versioned)
> > and
> > Provieds-Virtual {any program of a kind ex:wwwbrowser, not versioned}
> > cause there are problems with unversioned Provides now
>
> I fail to see exactly what you are proposing here.. can you explain it
> a bit more?
I suggest spliting Provides field in deb's control into
two fields : one for virtual packages (what provides was to be)
and one for physical ones (when a lib CONTAINS other). So this lib
need a version.
Current example is :
libgtk-perl # normal lib causing no problems
libgtk-imlib-perl # previous file with some stuff more
libgnome-perl # previous file with some stuff more
every package CONTAINS previous one and a few more files and `Provides:'
all previous (libgtk-imlib-perl:libgtk-perl)(libgnome-perl:libgtk-imlib-perl,libgtk-perl)
and have the same version but version is not inherited yet
So econfigedit `depends on' libgtk-imlib-perl and makes it impossible to
use libgnome-perl.
So I suggest two fields not just one (I just invented better name)
Provides: # technically : unversioned
Contains: # technically : versioned
this mean we will add `Contains' field in place of some `Provides'
And this (or similar) gives us possibility of standarizing lib names
also (deb with standarized name will `Contain' and `Conflict' with old package
all dependencies will be happy cause versions are correct)
> Also, dpkg might get versioned provides in the near future.
I hope so and I suggest some concept of making it here
Reply to: