On Thu, May 26, 2005 at 11:46:27AM -0700, Keith Packard wrote:
> On Thu, 2005-05-26 at 20:18 +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
>
> > My personnal opinion is that libraries should not depend on
> > non-libraries, so yes. However I am not familiar enough with fontconfig
> > to guess why this dependency was added.
>
> I adopted this package from Josselin Mouette with this dependency in
> place. I'm afraid it looks necessary as
> the configuration files and support application live in 'fontconfig'
> while the library itself lives in 'libfontconfig1'. Both must be
> installed for the system to work correctly.
>
> Because of the pervasive (and reasonable) use of ${shlibs:Depends} in
> other packages, many application packages that need fontconfig will only
> end up with a dependency on libfontconfig1.
But they just follow the instruction given by libfontconfig1, because
this is libfontconfig1 which provide the shlibs file in the first place.
> Conversely, font packages which don't need the library and yet still
> want to install custom fontconfig aliases or other configuration changes
> will reasonably depend on fontconfig.
>
> So, we have two possible reasons for installing fontconfig which lead to
> two different but reasonable Depends: entries.
>
> Any thoughts on how to make this work?
In theory, yes. Change the libfontconfig1 shlibs file to something like:
libfontconfig 1 libfontconfig1 (>= 2.3.0), fontconfig
and rebuild every packages using libfontconfig1. At which point you can
safely remove the fontconfig dependency, and you did not created new
circular dependendencies.
Cheers,
--
Bill. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Imagine a large red swirl here.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
