Bug#622837: libpcsclite1: please drop Recommends: pcscd
Hello,
Le 15/04/11 22:04, Don Armstrong a écrit :
Couple of questions:
1) Is libpcsclite1 capable of failing gracefully when pcsd isn't
installed?
Yes.
2) Why was the Suggest: pcscd upgraded to a Recommends: pcscd?
I moved from Suggest: to Depends: in version 1.6.0-1
* debian/control: libpcsclite1 now Depends: instead of Suggests: on
pcscd The daemon is not started at boot time but only on request so the
CPU cost is zero if not used.
I made the move because pcscd was no more started at system boot so no
new process was running unless the smart card is really used.
I discovered the use of libpcsclite1 by wpasupplicant after I reveived
the "bugs" about the "extra" dependency. I do not use wpasupplicant myself.
Because of bug #612971 I moved from a strict Depends: to a softer
Recommends: in version 1.7.0-1
* Fix "please drop dependency on pcscd". libpcsclite1 now Recommends:
instead of Depends: on pcscd (Closes: #612971)
3) Why is there a versioned Recommends: on an exact version pcscd?
Because libpcsclite1 and pcscd use an ad-hoc protocol. The protocol
sometimes evolve and I do not want to maintain a backward compatibility.
I added the exact version to solve bug #613405
4) Do network-manager, wpasupplicant, and wicd output sensible error
messages when pcscd isn't installed or running?
No idea. I do not use these software.
5) Is it the intention to have pcscd running on most systems which
have wpasupplicant, network-manager, or wicd installed?
6) Considering http://qa.debian.org/popcon.php?package=pcsc-lite and
http://qa.debian.org/popcon-graph.php?packages=pcscd, is it reasonable
to suggest that most people wanted pcscd installed in the past?
Regarding the popularity of libpcsclite1 compared to pcscd a lot of
users have libpcsclite1 installed but do not use smart cards (by a
factor x20).
I had not checked this graphic. Thanks for the URL.
I guess reverting from Recommends: to Suggest: is the correct way to
solve this "bug".
--
Dr. Ludovic Rousseau
Reply to: