Bug#391826: please don't depend on zaptel

[Kilian Krause]

Tzafrir,

On Sun, Dec 03, 2006 at 11:17:37AM +0200, Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 08, 2006 at 08:37:26PM +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
> > Package: zaptel-source
> > Version: 1:1.2.9.1.dfsg-1+rmh
> > Severity: wishlist
> > 
> > Please don't make zaptel-modules-xxxx depend on zaptel.  The latter wants
> > devices created by loading modules in the former to exist during its postinst,
> > but this won't happen the first time you install zaptel-modules, resulting in
> > errors (you have to force a re-run zaptel's postinst).
> 
> Sorry for the late catch, but:
> 
> the package zaptel contains the binary ztcfg, without which none of the
> zaptel modules can function (though I have a pending patch to give
> default configuration to analog Zaptel channels without the use of
> ztcfg).
> 
> So at the price of a error in the postinst (which has been supressed to
> a warning in later versions of the package) you get correct package
> dependencies.

Right, it should be re-added IMHO as otherwise it's plain useless to
have a module without control over its initialisation. That would mean
as much as stuffing an unsupported card into the PC and not loading any
driver for it.


> How else can you express here a relation? Zaptel recommends a
> zaptel-modules package?

No more.

Apart from that we should've gone with 1.2.11~dfsg rather than
1.2.11.dfsg in case Digium considers doing an 1.2.11.1... Let's hope
they won't.

-- 
Best regards,
Kilian