Re: architecture-specific dependencies on virtual packages
David Kalnischkies wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 11:36 PM, Jonathan Nieder <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> I agree here. If I understand correctly, you are saying that it would
>> be best if a dependency
>> Package: a
>> Depends: phonon-backend
>> should only be satisfied by a package from another architecture with
>> Package: b
>> Provides: phonon-backend
>> if package b also has Multi-Arch: foreign.
> Yeap, that is what I would expect and it is what APT currently does.
> This thread is a try to understand why dpkg does it differently.
> aka: Valid reasons or just a bug?
Sounds like just a bug.
>> most sensible to make this dependency only satisfiable by non-virtual
> I can't follow on that one as if you are referring to the example above
> we suddenly have no dependencies left which could be satisfied by virtuals.
> So you probably lost me somewhere.
Yes, you have lost me, too. :)
Let me try again. I believe that a dependency like this:
is referring to a specific, concrete, non-virtual package package-foo
and it doesn't make sense to allow this to be satisfied by virtual
I understand that neither dpkg nor apt works that way currently, but
that is what I think the right behavior would be.
We can talk about Conflicts later. Let's get this part ironed out