Re: Are circular dependencies inside a source package OK?
On 02/27/2011 04:31 PM, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> Ideally, we would have binary packages named like that:
> ruby-foo: arch-indep part of the foo library
> ruby1.8-foo: arch-dep part of the foo library, built for ruby1.8
> ruby1.9.1-foo: arch-dep part of the foo library, built for ruby1.9.1
Here you're basically at a point where Python was years ago - one binary
package for every supported version. i think you should find a way to
move the whole stuff for all ruby versions into one package and find a
proper way to handle dependencies and whatever else is needed.
Bernd Zeimetz Debian GNU/Linux Developer
GPG Fingerprints: ECA1 E3F2 8E11 2432 D485 DD95 EB36 171A 6FF9 435F