Bug#469204: kscreensaver-xsavers: please remove .desktop files and adjust dependencies on xscreensaver-*
On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 10:21 PM, Sune Vuorela <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> Wouldn't it have been much better to do:
> xscreensaver (metapackage pulling in what xscreensaver used to)
> xscreensaver-core (core backend without hacks)
> xscreensaver-data (standard hacks)
> (and so on)
That was an option, but we chose the other way. "Much better", I don't
know, either way.
> You definately need a versioned conflicts in xscreensaver against all versions
> of kscreensaver you are breaking with this change.
> Currently you are breaking kscreensaver, you are breaking partial upgrades
> from etch and in general just annoying me.
Yes, we can add the versioned conflicts. For your general annoyance I
can only suggest less coffee :)
> > In addition to the hacks, the -data package includes standard .desktop
> > files for each hack. (Same goes for -data-extra, -gl and gl-extra).
> > These are in /usr/share/applications/screensavers.
> > In the future, we might move hacks beetween -data and -data-extra. Other
> > packages should therefore not depend on individual hacks, but look for
> > the installed .desktop files. (Same goes for -gl vs -gl-extra).
> > Tip: If you still need to ship a .desktop file for an executable from
> > another package, include the TryExec key in the .desktop file.
> Tip: if you are breaking other packages, please warn them ahead and send
> patches ahead.
> Tip2: if you are trying to do advices on what to do, please test it
> beforehand. kscreensaver needs its own desktop files in its own location.
(How excellent satire.) I don't understand what ways you're using your
own desktop files, but never mind. You probably just can get a small
patch from Ubuntu - there kscreensaver-xsavers also ships own desktop
files but seems to deal gracefully with hacks that are not installed.
Some of your fellow co-maintainers should know the details.
> Any information please. It has worked very well so far - I see absolutely no
> proper reasoning in what you write about this split.
This is for the good for all of us. You are probably using KDE, but
there's more out there. That it used to work for you didn't mean it
was all perfect.
> For me, it just looks like "we can split it - let's do it" - and even done in
> a much breaking way.
Let's don't get so dramatic. From what I saw from the report,
kscreensaver did not break so terribly, just a few non-existing savers
showed up in the preferences. If we really want to fix this quickly,
just add dependencies to xscreensaver-data and
xscreensaver-data-extra. However, once it's fixed properly, I suggest
removing the dependency on xscreensaver-data-extra.