Re: libraries being removed from the archive
On Sun, 3 Aug 2003, Chris Cheney wrote:
> Seriously, if we want to ever release sarge we are going to need to stop
> making libraries disappear, every time we rebuild something it takes
> another 10 days for it to migrate into testing and everything that
> depends on it is also pushed back another 10 days. Even if the person
> causing the breakage NMU's all the affected packages it still causes
> them to wait another 10 days to migrate, and causes unneeded load on
> the buildds, possibly with the packages no longer being able to be
> built since gcc 3.3 is so anal now. (/me wonders how many RC bugs are
> around just for gcc 3.3 related crap)
So, let's say libexif9 is uploaded, and libexif8 stays around. Do you really
want to release a package into stable, that requires an old version of a
library? Wouldn't it be better to be compiled against the latest?
If the old libraries stay around, then this could easily happen. Removing the
old libraries(or packages), means that these problems can be spotted easily.
Perhaps someone should write a script to detect these uninstallable issues,
and notify the maintainers of the dependant packages when they occur.
That would be more useful, imho, then keeping the archive bloated with stale
code/source.
Reply to: