Bug#791589: Your mail
fabian at debian.org
Thu Jul 16 07:28:37 UTC 2015
Am Mittwoch, den 15.07.2015, 03:15 +0200 schrieb Jack Underwood:
> I find that thread a bit difficult to follow, did you mean that
I admit it is, because both you and I have mixed up the musescore-1.x
and musescore-2.0 packages in the course of our discussion.
> musescore-2.0 should depend
> on musescore-soundfont-gm-1.3 and not musescore-soundfont-gm-2.0?
No, musescore (>= 2.0) should not depend on any other soundfont package
-- just as it currently is. The Suggests relations to other soundfont
-providing packages should also be fine as they are.
> Why do we have to wait for ftp-master approval of timgm6mb-soundfont?
Because musescore-soundfont-gm has been turned into a dummy package
that has "Depends: timgm6mb-soundfont" -- rightly so. But, if the
latter package is not in the archive, this dependency cannot be
satisfied, which in turn is a policy violation, and thus a release
-critical bug, ans thus avoids the whole package from entering testing.
> As discussed above musescore-2.0 should come with its own soundfont
> already included,
Yes, it is in musescore-common (>= 2.0).
> thus we just need to remove musescore-soundfont-gm as a dependency for
Yes, this has already happened for musescore (>= 2.0).
> It could get made a suggestion, but perhaps not needed as it simply
> duplicates the other
It's successor package, timgm6mb-soundfont, i.e. the one that musescore
-soundfont-gm (>= 2.0) depends on, is already among the suggested
packages for musescore (>= 2.0).
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
More information about the pkg-multimedia-maintainers