Re: libpcsclite1: please drop Recommends: pcscd

[Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>]

Ludovic Rousseau wrote:

> The protocol version is exchanged as the first message.

Ah, that's a comfort.

> The ABI between pcscd and libpcsclite is not used by any other
> software I know. And should not be used by other components. It is an
> internal ad-hoc protocol.

As is that.

>> One (ugly?) alternative would be for pcscd to depend on the
>> corresponding version of libpcsclite1.  Once libpcslite2 comes around,
>> it would have to use Breaks against the old version of pcscd.
>
> Wouldn't that create a circular dependency?
> pcscd Depends: libpcsclite1
> libpcsclite1 Suggests: pcscd
>
> I fixed a similar problem in #612972 a few weeks ago.

No, this type (Depends one way, Suggests the other way) of circular
dependency is harmless.  A Depends relation constrains configuration
order but a Suggests relation does not, so dpkg does not have to break
the dependency chain anywhere (see policy §7.2).

Probably policy should be clarified to use the term "Depends loop"
in place of dependency loop to clarify this; will file a bug for this
tomorrow if I remember to.

> Regards,

Thanks again.

Good night,
Jonathan