why is "src:glx-alternatives" in Ubuntu?

[Andreas Beckmann]

On 2013-06-02 21:25, Graham Inggs wrote:
> Should I file a bug to have glx-alternatives removed and blacklisted?

I think so.

> I've just submitted bug #710820 for nvidia-cuda-toolkit to build-depend on
> the nvidia-* packages in Saucy.
> 
> I have been trying to think of a better way of doing this.  Do you think
> the following might work?
> 
> Let all nvidia-* packages >= 304.54 provide a libcuda5 virtual package.
> When nvidia-cuda-toolkit 5.1 or 6 comes out, we can provide libcuda5.1 or
> libcuda6 as necessary and if the package is backward compatible, provide
> libcuda5 as well.

libcuda5 is a bad name, what about cuda-5-library?
or libcuda-5.0-1 ?
5.0 for the SOVERSION used in the cuda toolkit,
1 for the SOVERSION of libcuda

> There would still be an issue when a package depending on libcuda is built
> in the archive, for example, against nvidia-current, but the user has
> nvidia-experimental installed and these two packages conflict.  This was
> not a problem in Precise, but became one in Quantal.  If these packages
> must conflict, then we need a mechanism to remove the dependency on the
> package it was built against and replaced with libcuda5.  Currently, this
> is done in debian/shlibs.local which is generated by debian/rules, however
> if we can move to a libcuda5 virtual package, I think shlibs.local can be
> simplified to:
> libcuda 1  libcuda5

could work :-)


Andreas