On Sat, Nov 03, 2007 at 07:11:41PM +0000, David wrote: > You are right. After installing libfftw3-3 and libfftw3-dev, I was able to > remove fftw3 and fftw3-dev without breaking dependencies. apt tools will know about that. > But an important question is: *how should a sid user had found that?* I am > interested, if someone can explain me, could you please tell to the list or > only to my email address? > > And another question: now, why is apt happy about the dependencies? I mean: > octave2.9 depends on fftw3, now fftw3 is removed, but octave2.9 is still > there. *How does apt know that the dependencies are satisfied?* > > Oh, I see: if I select on synaptic libfftw3-3, go to properties, to > dependencies, and to "provided packages", fftw3 is listed there. Is that the > reason? yes, and that's why no user needs to really know about the rename, because the new packages "Provide" the old ones, and new packages needing one or the other will use the new names. So if the library is used as a dependency, then it will be pulled automatically by one of the two reasons I cited. Of course, if you are in the rare case where fftw3 + its dev package are installed on your system because you hack with it then to hide the rename, using a transitional package is required. Though for libraries one usually don't do that because people developping with it are supposed to be clever enough, and other people won't see a thing. -- ·O· Pierre Habouzit ··O madcoder@debian.org OOO http://www.madism.org
Attachment:
pgpV_jsSHsTZ_.pgp
Description: PGP signature