Re: reasons for split of libavcodec54 and libavcodec-extra-54, missing codecs and a metapackage.

[Reinhard Tartler <siretart@gmail.com>]

On Nov 20, 2014 3:01 PM, "Jonas Smedegaard" <dr@jones.dk> wrote:
>
> Quoting Andreas Cadhalpun (2014-11-20 17:09:49)
> > On 19.11.2014 13:09, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> >> Possibly we can simplify even further:
> >>
> >>    * Have package libavcodec-extra-NN provide virtual libavcodec-extra
> >>      (i.e. non-versioned name of itself)
> >>    * Let GPLv2 packages conflict against libavcodec-extra (i.e. not
> >>      replace but complement existing suggests/recommends/depends).
> >>
> >> How does that sound?
> >
> > This sounds good, except that the virtual package needs another name,
> > because libavcodec-extra is actually a real package [1].
>
> I don't see a problem in conflicting both with virtual provisions of the
> package and the real package - as the latter seems to me to provide
> nothing beyond pulling in latest of those same virtual provisions.

I'm pretty sure that this approach makes it impossible to have a versioned dependency on libavcodec-extra. Not sure if there is an actual need for this, though.

Reinhard