On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 11:03, IOhannes m zmoelnig <zmoel...@iem.at> wrote:
> Package: jackd2
> Version: 1.9.7~dfsg-1
> Severity: normal
>
> currently libjack "recommends" to install jackd, which usually evaluates to 
> not
> automatically install jackd if a package depends on libjack.
>
> i read bug-report #442814 which implemented the change from "suggests" to
> "recommends" but i am not totally convinced that i can follow the argument
> (being myself rather audio-centric, so i have a natural bias ;-))
>
> in short:
> - a lot of audio-packages have jack support and thus depend on libjack
> - installing libjack does not mean that jackd _must_ be installed (great, i 
> like
>  weak dependencies)
> - however, installing libjack will not trigger an installation of jackd (due 
> to
>  the _very_ weak dependency), thus most installations will end up without 
> jackd
>  installed (that was the purpose of #442814)
> - if the user wants to use the jack-enabled application (which they installed
>  using apt), it will not work in most of these installations as jack cannot be
> started, giving a cryptic error (e.g. "/usr/bin/jackd not found"), leaving the
> use alone
>
> i therefore suggest to raise dependency-level of libjack towards jackd to
> "suggests" again, so people will actually be able to use their installed
> jack-enabled applications.

I think you have misunderstood dependency relationships. Recommends is
stronger, and will be installed by default by apt.

-- 

Saludos,
Felipe Sateler



_______________________________________________
pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list
pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers

Reply via email to