Re: Bug#30739: When a tiny part of a package uses non-free libraries
Brian Mays wrote:
> Peter S Galbraith <GalbraithP@dfo-mpo.gc.ca> wrote:
> > When selecting which level of dependency to use you should consider
> > how important the depended-on package is to the functionality of
> > the one declaring the dependency. Some packages are composed of
> > components of varying degrees of importance. Such a package should
> > list using Depends the package(s) which are required by the more
> > important components. The other components' requirements may be
> > mentioned as Suggestions or Recommendations, as appropriate to the
> > components' relative importance.
> > Note that the above says nothing about a dependency which would
> > force something into contrib. Perhaps this sounds harsh, but would
> > Michael _not_ have downgraded the libforms dependency to `suggests' if
> > libforms had been in main instead of non-free?
> I assume that you are really referring to me and not Michael, since I
> am the maintainer of pcmcia-cs. (Michael was simply expressing his
Sorry about that. Long thread.
> Yes, I would have used "Suggests," and for the same reason
> that fetchmail "Suggests" python. The executable that requires the
> other package is an extra feature and contributes nothing to the
> essential operation of the package.
Good for you then. I'd hate to see the other start happening and
changing the barrier between a minor binary and a not-so-minor
one, all for the sake of not going into contrib. I hope you see
what I mean.
> > This means that he's correct and that what I always thought about
> > Debian packages is false: Dependency _don't_ guarantee that every
> > installed binary will work.
> Yes. And this is the source of the current confusion.
Man, what a thread. At least I understand dependencies better,
specially as they apply to multi-component packages.