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

Re: building fake gstreamer packages



Le 16.02.2014 13:10, Ralf Mardorf a écrit :

On Sun, 2014-02-16 at 16:01 +0400, Reco wrote:

So, the only way that I see is to make a fake package
called libgstreamer0.10-0 with highest version possible (9999-1
should do).


My first mail didn't came through the list until now.

I'm using the date for the version.

-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: Re: building fake gstreamer packages
Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2014 12:49:05 +0100
Mailer: Evolution 3.10.4
On Sun, 2014-02-16 at 12:23 +0100, berenger.morel@neutralite.org wrote: 
=========================
Package: gstreamer-nullifier
Version: 0.10.0

Architecture: amd64
Maintainer: bmorel
Provides: libgstreamer-plugins-base0.10-0, libgstreamer0.10-0
Section: libs
Priority: optional
Description: Allow to remove dependencies on gstreamer.
=========================


I would try

Section: libs
Priority: optional
Standards-Version: 3.9.2

Package: libgstreamer-plugins-base0.10-0
Version: 20140216
Maintainer: bmorel
Architecture: all
Description: libgstreamer-plugins-base0.10-0 dummy package

and

Section: libs
Priority: optional
Standards-Version: 3.9.2

Package: libgstreamer0.10-0
Version: 20140216
Maintainer: bmorel
Architecture: all
Description: libgstreamer0.10-0 dummy package
I see. I suspected something like that, "virtual packages" which could not have a version string.
It almost works like this, except that it breaks skype ( which is, of course, compiled for i386 and so require multiarch. It's quite messy btw! ). So I removed skype, I'll work around that problem later.
Thanks for the help. Maybe with some more work I could remove gconf btw. Lot of programs "needs" it, through libraries, but in the facts, they does not really do. Maybe the better would be to find them some alternatives.
Now, I wonder, should I report as a bug the fact that tools like, say, gimp, require ( depends, instead of, maybe, recommends ) gstreamer in their dependencies but never use sound? At least, I think it does not... because I do not choose to switch to linux to have pseudo-mandatory stuff.
Reply to: