> first thanks for your report and trying to make Debian better. :-)
Thanks! :)
> But I have to close your report, because it is not a circular dependency as
> written in Debian policy 7.2. The problem with circular depends are at the
> dpkg part, not apt{itude}, and dpkg does not care about recommends.
So "Recommends" doesn't matter? I'm not absolutely sure, but I think
that on Ubuntu, packages under "Recommends" are installed, it would a
pitty to make a specific version just to remove this type of
dependency.
Also consider the fact that luckybackup-data is just plain data, it
should not depend on the binary luckybackup, since it can be installed
on its own (e.g. a user wants the graphics only).
And from 7.2 policy, "Enhances" seems much more appropriate:
"Enhances
This field is similar to Suggests but works in the opposite
direction. It is used to declare that a package can enhance the
functionality of another package."
luckybackup-data enhances (i.e. is used by) luckybackup, not the other
way around, isn't it?
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2005/06/msg02111.html
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2005/11/msg01101.html
Quoting Bill Allombert:
"foo <--> foo-data: The foo-data --> foo deps is generally wrong."
P.S. I've CC'ed him just to be sure.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
