[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: -data packages and recommends?

On Thu, Feb 14, 2008 at 10:34:04PM -0500, Andres Mejia wrote:
> On Thursday 14 February 2008 5:18:56 pm Bas Wijnen wrote:
> > So for packages which build their own data, I think it is good if the
> > relation is a strict Depends: foo-data (= ${source:~version}).
> If foo-data is binary-independent, the Depends version should be (>= 
> ${source:Version}), else it could break binNMUs.

First of all, sorry about the ~.  I must have thought I was in command
mode, where the ~ would turn the 'v' into a 'V'. ;-)

= is not a problem, though: with a binary-only NMU, the source version
doesn't change.  Since we don't put a Depends: on the data package,
using >= would allow an old binary to be installed with a new source.
We have no reason to believe that that should work.

The binNMU problem is solved with using ${source:Version} instead of
${binary:Version}.  The latter causes problems, because the binary
version of the NMU _is_ different.


I encourage people to send encrypted e-mail (see http://www.gnupg.org).
If you have problems reading my e-mail, use a better reader.
Please send the central message of e-mails as plain text
   in the message body, not as HTML and definitely not as MS Word.
Please do not use the MS Word format for attachments either.
For more information, see http://pcbcn10.phys.rug.nl/e-mail.html

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: