Re: testing/excuses - why not geda?
On Tue, Apr 08, 2003 at 12:56:57AM +1000, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 07, 2003 at 03:10:23PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
> > Are all the Conflicts: in libgeda18 strictly necessary? They make normal
> > upgrading as well as migration into testing more painful, and the
> > various libgeda* packages don't seem to share any files.
> Hmm, I suppose not. Actually, in this case having the SONAME in the
> package name is having no benefit and is quite a nuisance, so I might
> ditch it soon.
The benefit of having the SONAME in the package name is that you don't
have to depend on 'libgeda (>= 18), libgeda (<< 19)', which makes
upgrades more painful because you have to deconfigure all of the
packages depending on libgeda before you can upgrade libgeda in order to
upgrade the packages depending on it, and makes upgrading just some
geda-* packages and not the others impossible.
At least, that's how I understand it without knowing geda very well.
Colin Watson [firstname.lastname@example.org]