Hi,
Quoting Steffen Möller (2016-01-15 11:58:47)
> On 15/01/16 09:33, Harald Dunkel wrote:
> > On 01/14/2016 10:11 AM, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
> >> On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 09:35:31AM +0100, Harald Dunkel wrote:
> >>> Another example:
> >>>
> >>> Package: mykde
> >>> Version: all
> >>> Depends: ${misc:Depends}
> >>> . kde-full
> >>> , mykde1 (kde-full >= 5:66)
> >>> , mykde2 (kde-full >= 5:77)
> >>> , mykde3 (kde-full >= 5:84)
> >>>
> >>> Package mykde1
> >>> :
> >>> :
> >> This is even less clear.
> >>
> > In this example mykde depends upon kde-full and a set of other
> > packages, depending upon the version of kde-full.
> >
> > I am not proud of the syntax, either. Surely you have a better
> > suggestion about how to express this kind of package dependencies.
> >
> The '|' character to express a condition is already taken,
> and so are the parentheses.
>
> How about some Perl-like post-annotation as in
>
> Package: mykde
> Version: all
> Depends: ${misc:Depends}
> . kde-full
> , mykde1 if kde-full >= 5:66
> , mykde2 if kde-full >= 5:77
> , mykde3 if kde-full >= 5:84
>
> This way you can mix the two semantics
>
> Package: mykde
> Version: all
> Depends: ${misc:Depends}
> . kde-full
> , mykde1 (>= 4.99)if kde-full >= 5:66
> , mykde1 (>= 5.0) if kde-full >= 5:77
>
> How long will it take until someone implements tic-tac-toe
> with Debian package dependencies? Just kidding.
how about playing sudoku with Debian package dependencies:
http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/pipermail/dose-devel/2013-December/000059.html
cheers, josch
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: signature