Re: Is declaring correct deps/conflicts for versions not in stable really no longer needed?
On Tuesday 12 October 2004 12:33, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 12, 2004 at 12:49:47PM +0400, Nikita V. Youshchenko wrote:
> > [attibution missing, probably Adam Conrad]
> > > Perhaps so, but if we went out of our way to depend/conflict against
> > > every broken package that's been in testing/unstable, package
> > > relationships would be ridiculousy unwieldly. The very reason
> > > testing/unstable exists is to weed out the bugs the best we can before
> > > a stable release.
> > I believe you are wrong.
> > If package requires a version of another package greater than X, it
> > should declare so in it's dependences, even if you are sure that next
> > stable release will satisfy this automatically.
> > Current situation is version of libapache-mod-php4 currently in testing
> > does not work correctly with version of libc6 currently in testing.
> If a certain range of versions of a package was buggy, that is annoying,
> but not a reason for all packages affected by it to depend on non-buggy
That is not always the way to go and depends on how long it will take to fix
the buggy package, and if any reasonable dependency alternatives could be
found. Good exaple is the recent dfsbuild, apt-move, gawk saga... Because of
#263964, the #274377 was reasinged to apt-move, and #265117 #274377 got
merged. That's because it is faster to complete #274377 and reduce the
impact, till #263964 gets properly fixed.
pub 4096R/0E4BD0AB 2003-03-18 <keyserver.bu.edu ; pgp.mit.edu>
fingerprint 1AE7 7C66 0A26 5BFF DF22 5D55 1C57 0C89 0E4B D0AB