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

Re: meaning & behaviour of "Replaces" in debs



On 2008-07-29 11:57 +0200, j.j.fishbat@gmail.com wrote:

> On my debian/testing machine I have a 3rd party package
> gerris-snapshot (the debian gerris package is very old).
> And ...
>
>   > apt-cache show libgsl0-dev
>
>   Package: libgsl0-dev
>   :
>   Version: 1.11-2
>   :
>   Depends: libgsl0ldbl (= 1.11-2)
>
>   > apt-cache show libgsl0ldbl
>
>   Version: 1.11-2
>   Replaces: gsl, libgsl0 (<= 1.9-4)
>   :
>   Conflicts: gsl, libgsl0

See http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=477732 for the
reasons why this "Conflicts" is necessary.

>   > apt-cache show gerris-snapshot
>
>   Package: gerris-snapshot
>   Version: 1.2.0-080705
>   Depends: libc6-dev | libc-dev, libgts-snapshot-dev (>= 0.7.6),
>   pkg-config, gcc, sed, gawk, m4, proj, libnetcdf3, libgsl0

This seems strange.  Why should it depend on sed, which is an essential
package?  And why does it not have versioned dependencies on the last
two libraries?

> so that if I want to use the GSL development library
>
>   > sudo apt-get install libgsl0-dev libgsl0ldbl
>   Reading package lists... Done
>   Building dependency tree
>   Reading state information... Done
>   The following packages will be REMOVED
>     gerris-snapshot gfsview-snapshot libgsl0 vfplot
>   The following NEW packages will be installed
>
> The author of the package is prepared to replace its dependancies
> by
>
>   Depends: libc6-dev | libc-dev, libgts-snapshot-dev (>= 0.7.6),
>   pkg-config, gcc, sed, gawk, m4, proj, libnetcdf3, libgsl0 |
> libgsl0ldbl

He's obviously not using normal Debian tools to build his package.
BTW, libnetcdf3 is not available in testing either.

> but queries why this should be necessary -- if  libgsl0ldbl
> replaces libgsl0 then shouldn't the package libgsl0ldbl suffice to
> satisfy gerris-snapshot's dependancy on libgsl0?

In general, no.  But it may work in this case, as libgs0dbl seems to be
compatible with libgs0 on some architectures, including i386.

> If not, would I be foolish to ask for this as a feature request?

Ask whom for what?

Sven


Reply to: