On Sun, Sep 07, 2008 at 10:32:29PM +0200, Josip Rodin wrote: > xserver-xorg-video-nv used to provide the xserver-xorg-video-1.0 virtual > package, and now the new version provides the xserver-xorg-video-2 virtual > package. But apt isn't catching on to the idea - it's ignoring the fact > that it can obtain xserver-xorg-video-2 simply by upgrading > xserver-xorg-video-nv. Instead it is parsing the dependency list as if it's > in a vacuum, seeing that xserver-xorg-video-2 isn't there, and therefore > installing xserver-xorg-video-all. > > In a simple A | B dependency, package A clearly takes precedence, that's > what the rules say. But that is oriented towards the new installs. > On upgrades, if B is obtained a) from an already installed package, just > a new version of it b) at a visibly smaller cost -- then that should be > taken into consideration. > > As a workaround, I'd just purge xserver-xorg and be done with it. > But xserver-xorg-core depends on it for some reason. The reason seems > to be http://bugs.debian.org/392295 Surely this could have been fixed > by putting that part of code into the xserver-xorg-core package instead > of creating a dependency which is circular?
Apparently this is discussed in http://bugs.debian.org/362313 and there's also http://bugs.debian.org/396613 I don't seem to see any reason for all that $SERVER_SYMLINK code. Why do we still have shared/default-x-server debconf stuff if xserver-xfree86 has been removed from lenny? And even so, wouldn't it be wiser to (also) handle that symlink in the xserver-xorg-core package which actually provides the /usr/bin/Xorg binary the link points to, rather than the meta package? -- 2. That which causes joy or happiness. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
