Re: Improving dependencies on shared libraries
On Sat, May 26, 2007 at 10:47:10PM +0200, Josselin Mouette <email@example.com> wrote:
> Le samedi 26 mai 2007 à 22:35 +0200, Raphael Hertzog a écrit :
> > > Another important point: such a system would help a lot to obtain lower
> > > testing migration times, but it would not help backports at all, since
> > > you still have to rebuild the package against the stable libc.
> > If you can reuse most of the build-deps from testing instead of having to
> > recompile the build-deps too, it helps a lot.
> The build-deps also need to be rebuilt against the stable libc.
> > If you can reuse a
> > package from testing in stable without recompiling, it also helps. :-)
> That would not happen if there is a major libc upgrade between stable
> and testing.
This is not true. Look at libxml2, for example. The higher symbol
version of libc it needs is 2.3.2, while it was built against (and now
depends on) libc 2.5.
The libxml2 package currently in sid could perfectly be used on etch if
its dependencies were not so tight. And a lot of packages are in the
same situation, not only because of the libc.
The same applies to libxml2 rdepends, by the way. Most don't use the
symbols that have been added in the latest versions, but still depend on
the latest because it has new symbols which means I have to bump the
shlibs. So technically, most packages built against libxml2 in sid would
be fine with the version of libxml2 in sarge ! (modulo bugs, obviously)