[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#708162: marked as done (libreoffice-common: depends (as first choice) on virtual/missing package libreoffice-style-default)

Your message dated Sun, 3 Dec 2017 19:18:37 +0100
with message-id <20171203181836.GA13436@rene-engelhard.de>
and subject line fixed in 1:5.4.2~rc1-1
has caused the Debian Bug report #708162,
regarding libreoffice-common: depends (as first choice) on virtual/missing package libreoffice-style-default
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
708162: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=708162
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message --- 
Package: libreoffice-common
Version: 1:4.0.3-2
Severity: normal

libreoffice-common depends on libreoffice-style-default | libreoffice-style

Packages are supposed to declare a non-virtual package as first choice.
(...or at least that's my understanding of the matter - I failed to
located the appropriate text in Debian Policy).

I see two ways to solve this:

 a) Provide meta-package libreoffice-style-default (which then depends
    on e.g. libreoffice-style-tango or libreoffice-style-oxygen)
 b) Change to depend on e.g. libreoffice-style-tango or
    libreoffice-style-oxygen

I suspect a) was intended (and perhaps even implemented in some other
distribution than Debian), and I see that as the preferrable approach,
as that allows for changing defaults without needing to recompile
LibreOffice, e.g. for Skolelinux which uses KDE (not GNOME).


 - Jonas

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
Version: 1:5.4.2~rc1-1

This was fixed in above version already.

--- End Message ---
Reply to: