Re: Getting rid of circular dependencies
On Sat, Jun 25, 2005 at 02:43:28PM +0900, Junichi Uekawa wrote:
>
> > 1) foo and foo-data. There is usualy no reason for foo-data to depend on
> > foo. foo-data does not provide user-visible interface, only data, so it
> > does not need to depend on foo.
>
> However, we have some users randomly filing bugs on
> foo-data that doesn't get uninstalled if it's no longer useful.
Fix the users, then!
> > 2) libfoo and foo-bin, where foo-bin include binaries linked with
> > libfoo. Usually libfoo only need to Depends on configuration data
> > in foo-bin and not on any binaries linked with libfoo (to avoid infinite
> > recursion). In that case it should be possible to split foo-bin in
> > foo-bin and foo-common, and change libfoo to depend on foo-common
> > instead.
>
> I'm rather doubtful it should be easy to fix this situation.
> I doubt having configuration data in foo-bin is a good idea,
> since it will generally cause problems when
> libfoo1/libfoo2 needs to coexist.
If it is not a good idea, all the more reason to introduce foo-common ?
Cheers,
--
Bill. <ballombe@debian.org>
Imagine a large red swirl here.
Reply to: