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

Re: source dependencies : virtual names



On Jul 24, Manoj Srivastava wrote
> 	Usually, one only changes the library *name* (from libc5 to
>  libc6, for example) when the change is going to be binary
>  incompatible. Or else one just bumps the version number from 2.0.4 to
>  2.1.0, say.
> 
> 	I think in the vast majority of cases, if the *name* of the
>  library package includes a vresion number, then packages compiled
>  with that will not be compatible with another *name*. 
> 
> 	Please correct me if I'm wrong (with examples, please).
> 
> 	In fact, I think that it is not worth making this policy
>  decision for the few packages that are the exceptions to the above
>  rule, it just add to the confusion.

my theory is :
there are some programs, that will also _compile_ clean with a newer
	version (lets say : they compiled with ncurses 1.9.9e (3.0), and
	will compile without changes with ncurses 1.9.9g (3.4)).
so i can go, throw all programs with source depending on ncurses-dev in
	a autocompiler using ncurses3.4, and if they compile without
	errors, i can release these new, ncurses3.4 compiled binaries.
result : less work for maintainers.

but you are right :
a) it's confusing : Depends: ncurses3.4 and Source-Depends: ncurses-dev
b) not all programs will compile right. (ok, we can mail the logfiles as
	maintonly bug reports)
c) the autocompiler could override the Source-Depens: ncurses3.0-dev 
	and try a ncurses3.4 without that.

what should i do now ?
please give me a short message, so i can decide.
i don't know if it's a good or a bad thing.

andreas


--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org . 
Trouble?  e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .


Reply to: