On 31 December 2010 13:44, Ken Restivo <ken@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 03:21:44PM -0800, Kim Cascone wrote: >> On 12/30/2010 12:57 PM, Paul Davis wrote: >>> On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 2:33 PM, Kim Cascone<kim@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> >>>> and I don't want to upgrade to Jack2 since Synaptic wants to wipe all my >>>> audio apps with the install >>>> not sure why this is unless none of the apps support Jack2 in which case >>>> I'll pass on installing it >>> apps do not support jack1 or jack2. they support jack. packaging that >>> makes a jack client depend on specifically jack2 or jack1 is >>> erroneous. >>> >> I see -- but why would installing Jack2 uninstall all my audio apps? >> anyone hazard a guess? >> > > Because your audio apps depend on JACK being present. No JACK, no audio apps, away they go. > > It's been a while since I dealt with packaging, but IIRC the correct way to do this is to have the JACK package and the JACK2 (jackdmp 1.92) package be "alternatives" to each other. > > This is, for example, how you can switch your MTA from Sendmail (eek!) to Postfix to ssmtp to whatever, without everything that depends on it being nuked. > > You might want to file a bug with Ubuntu. They dropped the ball on this one. The proper way is for both to provide a 'jack', which would be a virtual package. Your apps should stay content as long as the 'jackd' binary exists, i.e they should never explicitly depend on a 'jack1' or a 'jack2'. -- GPG/PGP ID: B42DDCAD _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-user mailing list Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
