Bug#1135063: texlive-full: should no longer depend on dvidvi, which is now a virtual package

Preuße, Hilmar <[email protected]> Mon, 27 Apr 2026 23:39:23 +0200

Newsgroups	gmane.linux.debian.devel.tetex
Message-ID	<4e4ccfa7-0093-468a-944c-320ad4fdbbdf__2699.10189542628$1777326088$gmane$org@web.de>

Control: severity -1 important

Am 27.04.2026 um 11:20 schrieb Vincent Lefevre:
> On 2026-04-27 10:49:36 +0200, Preuße, Hilmar wrote:
>> Am 27.04.2026 um 10:43 schrieb Vincent Lefevre:

Hello Vincent,

>>> At least when texlive-full is installed, it is still not possible to
>>> upgrade texlive with "apt upgrade", while "apt install texlive dvidvi-"
>>> works fine.
>>
>> Yes, correct, we can drop that depends, but I fail to see how this is RC.
> 
> Well, I'm not sure that depending on a virtual package without a
> real package first as an alternative is allowed by the policy anyway.
> 
> https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-relationships.html in
> "7.5. Virtual packages - Provides" says:
> 
>    To specify which of a set of real packages should be the default to
>    satisfy a particular dependency on a virtual package, list the real
>    package as an alternative before the virtual one.
> 
I see the word "should", so to me it does not seem to be a strict 
requirement, which deserves an RC bug. I'm putting it to important and 
will fix in next upload of texlive-base.

>> You can upgrade using "dist-upgrade", which will remove dvidvi.
> 
> This also confuses aptitude in its dependency resolution when one
> wants to select individual packages for upgrade. By choosing to
> upgrade the texlive package, aptitude proposes to remove dvidvi
> only at its 45th suggestion! And the 60th suggestion when choosing
> texlive-full for upgrade.
> 

The recommended way to do upgrades is apt or apt-get. I'm sorry to hear 
that aptitude can't handle the situation.

Hilmar
-- 
sigfault

OpenPGP_signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 840 B)