state of jed-extra
G. Milde
g.milde at web.de
Fri Jun 9 09:04:32 UTC 2006
On 8.06.06, Jörg Sommer wrote:
> G. Milde schrieb am Thu 08. Jun, 11:24 (+0200):
> > > > > > > G. Milde schrieb am Wed 31. May, 16:00 (+0200):
> > > > > > > > * updating jed-common, jed, xjed, and jed-extra in one run failed:
> But jed-common does not depend on jed. It can be installed without the
> jed package. Then it would also fail.
Should we mark jed-common and jed-extra as depending on jed|xjed?
Policy 7.2:
The Depends field should be used if the depended-on package is
required for the depending package to provide a significant amount of
functionality.
While jed-common and jed-extra will not do any harm without jed|xjed
(i.e. they are mostly useless but not broken), they depend on jed|xjed for a
"significant amount of functionality".
Maybe better Recommend:
The Recommends field should list packages that would be found together
with this one in all but unusual installations.
this would leave the possibility to use e.g. jed-extra with a locally
installed jed.
> > While dpkg doesnot resolve dependencies automagically,
...
> > * it is still the tool of choice for installing individually downloaded
> > packages
> ... for those who know how to use it.
Thanks for your hints, now I see what has been going on.
Still I think that moving the
> >
> > Conflicts: jed-extra (<= 1.0-1)
> >
> > from jed-common to jed and xjed is "the right way"
> > * jed 0.99.18 and xjed 0.99.18 use SLang 2, which breaks some
> > of the modes in jed-extra 1.0-1.
>
> But I don't know if this would justify a conflict. I'm in doubt if the
> conflict on jed-extra is right. If I remember correctly the conflict
> field is for conflicts of package on dpkg's view. Not for "A is not
> usable with B."
Policy 3.5
Every package must specify the dependency information about other
packages that are required for the first to work correctly.
I read this as
If A is broken as long as B is installed, A should declare a Conflict.
However, how should one solve the case:
B will become broken if A is installed
for a new version of A?
and how should I understand Policy 7.3
Conflicts entry should almost never have an "earlier than" version
clause. This would prevent dpkg from upgrading or installing the
package which declared such a conflict until the upgrade or removal of
the conflicted-with package had been completed.
? Is an "earlier than" version clause something like
Conflict: B (<= nn)
or
Conflict: B (=> nn)
?
If we remove the Conflict with jed-extra (<= 1.0-1), can we upload jed
0.99.18 to testing without waitig for jed-extra 2.2 ?
Sincerely
Günter
More information about the Pkg-jed-devel
mailing list