Bug#1040175: Wrong kind of dependency?

[Lorenzo <plorenzo@disroot.org>]

On Sat, 08 Jul 2023 13:32:57 +0200
Ingo Brückl <ib@wupperonline.de> wrote:

> On Sat, 8 Jul 2023 00:24:46 +0200, Lorenzo <plorenzo@disroot.org>
> wrote:
> 
> >> I assume that the bug has been fixed incorrectly.
> 
> > Can you elaborate?
> 
> There was no dependency before bullseye. You could (and can) install
> the skin without the gui (although it is pretty useless then).
> 
> The patch in #981838 should ensure that the skin works as intended,
> which requires at least mplayer-gui 2:1.4, meaning that older
> versions of the gui should be updated.

Bullseye is oldstable now; on a fresh install on Bullseye or later you
can't install the skin without the gui due to the dependency.
So the only chance to have the the skin with a old version of the gui (<
2:1.4) is when a user upgrade from oldoldstable.
In any case the standard upgrade procedure would ensure that both the
skin and mplayer-gui are updated, unless the user holds a package, that
is not something that Debian can fix.

Also, a breaks on current unstable that targets a version in
oldoldstable would be regarded as obsolete by Debian quality tools and
scheduled for a cleanup.

I think this bug should be closed, unless I'm overlooking something

> 
> > Breaks can ensure that this package is not installed alongside with
> > mplayer-gui < 2:1.4
> 
> This is how it should be.
> 
> > but it doesn't guarantee that mplayer-gui >= 2:1.4 is installed in
> > the system
> 
> If I understand correctly, "data" packages do not have dependencies
> on their "main" packages, but "main" packages have a "Depends:" or -
> in our case - a "Recommends:" on their "data" packages, but I may be
> wrong, of course.

I'm not sure what's the standard, but in this case it looks correct to
me: the skin is useless without the gui, so it has a dependency; the gui
can work without the skin although in most common case the user wants
the skin, so it has a recommends.

Lorenzo

> 
> Ingo