[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#87699: tetex-bin: Please don't. A "suggests" and possibly a warning on install is better



Atsuhito Kohda <kohda@pm.tokushima-u.ac.jp> cum veritate scripsit:

> > > A user who wants and so is familiar with texi2html will
> > > install texi2html even if there is no fake dependency,
> > > I guess.  Package name is self-explanatory or trivial.
> > 
> > We are not talking about a user, 
> > we are talking about apt, and dpkg, and buildd, and all
> > the other tools that exist.
> 
> Really?  I can't believe so.  If I understood correctly,
> Santiago's main concern was to provide smooth upgrading
> from potato to woody for a user.

Er... not we, sorry.

"I am not talking about a user".

Santiago's been talking about a user, I'm now talking about
Debian infrastructure, and packaging system.

> > I do not
> > propose to make tetex-bin to depend on texi2html forever, I just
> > propose doing so for woody. After woody the dependency may be dropped.
> 
> this is woody specific problem.  If this is a _general_ issue
> as you think, how this can be woody specific?

Er... this is a woody specific problem in that this is a specific 
problen in Debian packaging, dpkg nature.

The fundamental problem is that 
dpkg does not allow package contents to be split out.

We only have the package name (tetex-bin) to depend upon, 
not the binary name (usr/bin/texi2html)


regards,
	junichi


-- 
dancer@debian.org : Junichi Uekawa   http://www.netfort.gr.jp/~dancer
GPG Fingerprint : 17D6 120E 4455 1832 9423  7447 3059 BF92 CD37 56F4



Reply to: