Re: Proposal for fixing automake (was Re: State of automake packages)
On Sat, Jun 08, 2002 at 02:13:10AM -0400, Eric Dorland wrote:
> > One possibility is to make "automake1.4.deb" be the only package that
> > provides "automake", [...]
> Yes, but that seems like a bit of an inelegant solution, since it is
> possible for a package to want any automake, not necessarily
> automake1.4. It is possible to write Makefile.am's that are portable
> across all the current versions.
Does that also mean they'll be portable to automake1.7, or is it just
a coincidence that upstream haven't made incompatible changes for those
particular features? (Bitter? Who, me?) I haven't looked at automake1.6,
but if it doesn't conflict: with automake1.4, then presumably it doesn't
provide /usr/bin/automake?
> > There's probably no need for a dummy package -- they're only really
> > useful when you're splitting a package.
> Yes, but it might be nice for someone to do apt-get install automake
> and get a nice version of automake installed. I realize that's
> somewhat low priority, but it would still be nice :)
All you need for that is for "automake" to be provided by just one
package. But it's more important for the buildds to be able to do
"apt-get install automake" and have the version that satisfies the
build-dependencies correctly get installed.
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.
``BAM! Science triumphs again!''
-- http://www.angryflower.com/vegeta.gif
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: