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

Re: Package Reorganisations



_Gah_. Please don't cc me on list mail!

On Sat, Feb 03, 2001 at 12:26:23PM +1100, Brian May wrote:
> >>>>> "Anthony" =3D=3D Anthony Towns <aj@azure.humbug.org.au> writes:
>     Anthony> Well, first: please try to avoid it wherever
>     Anthony> possible. Making a dependency unsatisfiable is a Bad
>     Anthony> Thing, and not something to be done if you don't have a
>     Anthony> *very* good reason for it.
> I don't understand, why should you ever have to do it?

If the old layout was an unmaintainable mess, or if a new upstream
library changes it's soname and you don't want to keep maintaining the
old version as well.

>     Anthony> Fourth: if, after you've made sure that _all_ packages in
>     Anthony> unstable, in _all_ architectures have been rebuilt with
>     Anthony> the new dependencies, you find that your package isn't
>     Anthony> going into testing, mail me so I can special case the
>     Anthony> update in the scripts.
> I don't think openssl is getting installed (still).
> update_excuses says:
>      * openssl 0.9.6-1 (currently 0.9.4-5) (low)
>           + Maintainer: Christoph Martin <christoph.martin@uni-mainz.de>
>           + openssl uploaded 22 days ago, out of date by 12 days!
>           + valid candidate (will be installed unless it's dependent upon
>             other buggy pkgs)

update_output says:

    openssl: alpha: apache-ssl libapache-mod-ssl libnet-ssleay-perl lynx-ssl
                    ssltelnet sslwrap stone-ssl stunnel telnet-ssl telnetd-ssl
                    w3m-ssl

apache-ssl on alpha in testing depends on `libssl09 (>=3D 0.9.4)', apache-ssl
in unstable depends on `openssl (>=3D 0.9.6)', but update_excuses says:

     * apache-ssl 1.3.14.2.1+1.42-1 (currently 1.3.9.13-2) (low)
          + Maintainer: Christoph Martin <christoph.martin@uni-mainz.de>
          + only 1/10 days old

and the new apache-ssl hasn't been recompiled consistently across
architectures.

The soname change (which makes packages depending on libssl09
uninstallable) means all the packages across all architectures that
use ssl have to be added to testing simultaneously or else something
will break, which is what testing tries to avoid.

> ...so everything looks OK to me.

Cheers,
aj

-- 
Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.

``_Any_ increase in interface difficulty, in exchange for a benefit you
  do not understand, cannot perceive, or don't care about, is too much.''
                      -- John S. Novak, III (The Humblest Man on the Net)

Attachment: pgp3hdNBnK4OI.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: