On Wed, Jun 29, 2005 at 12:17:28AM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote: > On Tue, Jun 28, 2005 at 02:56:54PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 28, 2005 at 06:30:32PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote: > > > On Tue, Jun 28, 2005 at 04:05:55PM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote: > > > > Le mardi 28 juin 2005 à 14:51 +0200, Bill Allombert a écrit : > > > > > 1) include the offending binary (e.g. fc-cache) in the library package. > > > > > > > > No. See policy, §8.2. > > > You could ship fc-cache as /usr/lib/libfontconfig1/fc-cache > > > so it will not need to conflict with libfontconfig2. > > But then packages that need fc-cache have an additional burden of updating > > the path to fc-config every time the soname changes. > Packages needing fc-cache outside of libfontconfig1 can use the symlink > /usr/bin/fc-cache -> /usr/lib/libfontconfig1/fc-cache provided by > fontconfig (which they already depends on). fontconfig will of course > depend on libfontconfig1 (as it already do). > We only want to get rid of the libfontconfig1 depending on fontconfig. > libfontconfig1 will be able to call /usr/lib/libfontconfig1/fc-cache > without fontconfig itself being installed. Ah, quite -- sorry for not reading more closely. > > These circular deps > > aren't pretty, but I don't see that any of the alternatives are actually > > better. > Unless you propose some ways to handle circular deps reliably, it is not an > esthetic issue at all. The actual impact in this case is minimal, AFAIK. -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature