Re: strange package dependencies

[Christoph Groth <cgroth@gmx.net>]

Joachim Trinkwitz <jtr@uni-bonn.de> writes:

> > So apt wants to replace libesd-alsa0 with libesd0.  But why?
> > Sure, xtux depends on `libesd0 (>= 0.2.14-0.2)' but `libesd-alsa
> > 0.2.17-7' which is installed provides `libesd0'.  What is the
> > point in replacing `libesd-alsa 0.2.17-7' with `libesd0 0.2.17-7'?
> 
> Some older packages aren't aware of libesd-alsa0 providing libesd0

Does a package really have to be aware of the fact that another
package provides something it needs?  I think that this is solved by
the package manager.  The package just says "I need foo" and doesn't
care in which way foo is provided.  At least this seems to be the
logical way to do it...

> (packages have to have an explicit dependancy on "libesd0 |
> libesd-alsa0" to be installed with the latter one, it's not enough
> that libesd-alsa0 provides the previous one).

If you are right then `provides' wouldn't have any sense!  Or am I
missing something?

So which is the correct answer to the "xtux depends on libesd0 which
is provided by libesd-alsa0"-problem?

1) xtux wants not any libesd0 but specifies a version.  However
   libesd-alsa0 provides a libesd0 without any version so it cannot
   satisfy xtux.

2) The answer Joachim posted


Christoph