[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#413353: marked as done (New virtual package: dict-freedict)

Your message dated Thu, 03 Jan 2013 13:00:49 -0800
with message-id <87d2xmugla.fsf@windlord.stanford.edu>
and subject line Re: Bug#413353: debian-policy: New virtual package: dict-freedict
has caused the Debian Bug report #413353,
regarding New virtual package: dict-freedict
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
413353: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=413353
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message --- 
Package: debian-policy 
Priority: wishlist

Hi all,

I recommend to add the virtual package "dict-freedict" to the virtual
package list. When I adopted the orphaned 'freedict' debian package,
I have replaced the 'dict-freedict' meta package with the 'dict-freedict'
virtual package (as was suggested in #205417). Now the package, which
requires at least one dictionary may depend on this virtual package,
and user not need to to install all dictionaries. So, this virtual
package actually exists since 14 Aug 2005. See:     
http://packages.debian.org/unstable/virtual/dict-freedict

Now the dict-servers (dictd, serpento) and dict-clients (dict, kdict,
opendict, ...) may to add this virtual package to the Recommends or
Suggests fields in the debian/control files (as it is in the package
'latrine' a long time since).

I propose to include the such entry to the virtual package list:

dict-freedict - a FreeDict dictionary, formatted for the dictionary
                server and client which uses the DICT Protocol.

I am sorry, that I so long delayed to offer to add this virtual package
to the virtual package list.  

Best regards,
-- 
Kęstutis Biliūnas <kebil@kaunas.init.lt>

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: =?UTF-8?Q?=C5=A0i?= =?UTF-8?Q?_lai=C5=A1ko?= dalis yra =?UTF-8?Q?pasira=C5=A1yta?= skaitmeniniu =?UTF-8?Q?b=C5=ABdu?=


--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
Russ Allbery <rra@debian.org> writes:
> Tatsuya Kinoshita <tats@vega.ocn.ne.jp> writes:
>> kebil (at kaunas.init.lt) wrote:

>>> I recommend to add the virtual package "dict-freedict" to the virtual
>>> package list. When I adopted the orphaned 'freedict' debian package, I
>>> have replaced the 'dict-freedict' meta package with the 'dict-freedict'
>>> virtual package (as was suggested in #205417). Now the package, which
>>> requires at least one dictionary may depend on this virtual package,
>>> and user not need to to install all dictionaries. So, this virtual
>>> package actually exists since 14 Aug 2005. See:
>>> http://packages.debian.org/unstable/virtual/dict-freedict
>>>
>>> Now the dict-servers (dictd, serpento) and dict-clients (dict, kdict,
>>> opendict, ...) may to add this virtual package to the Recommends or
>>> Suggests fields in the debian/control files (as it is in the package
>>> 'latrine' a long time since).
>>>
>>> I propose to include the such entry to the virtual package list:
>>>
>>> dict-freedict - a FreeDict dictionary, formatted for the dictionary
>>>                 server and client which uses the DICT Protocol.

>> This virtual package is privately, amongst a cooperating group of
>> packages, so adding it to the virtual package list is unnecessary,
>> I think.

> I think the discussion on this bug indicated that this wasn't required
> (particularly since we also now have dictd-dictionary as a virtual
> package), and this virtual package doesn't appear to be in use currently
> in the archive.  I'm therefore marking this bug as rejected, but it will
> stay open for some time in case my understanding is incorrect and this
> is still an issue that we should deal with.

There has been no further discussion of this, so I'm now closing it.

-- 
Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org)               <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>

--- End Message ---
Reply to: