[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Bug#439389: Changes in the xine-lib package require changes in xine-frontends


Le lundi 22 octobre 2007 à 15:30 +0200, Reinhard Tartler a écrit :
> Josselin Mouette <joss@debian.org> writes:
> > Le lundi 22 octobre 2007 à 13:58 +0200, Julien Cristau a écrit :
> >> So if I have the frontend from etch, and upgrade to the new libxine1
> >> without installing libxine1-x, the frontend is broken?
> Err, I've never heared that partial upgrades were supported. 

There's a difference between supporting them and knowingly breaking them
- and knowingly breaking all upgrades in testing and unstable without
adding proper Conflicts.

> AFAIK, if
> you decide to stay on etch and want to upgrade libxine1 only, the
> procedure is called a 'backport'.

No, it is called a partial upgrade and it should work, because working
partial upgrades are a necessary condition for working full upgrades,
and a necessary condition for a usable unstable distribution. If a
specific partial upgrade doesn't work, you should mark it with a
"Conflicts:" field (until the "Breaks:" field is implemented).

Otherwise, we could as well use Redhat or Ubuntu.

> > Yes. It sounds to me that the cure is worse than the disease.
> Sorry? Can you please elaborate on this?
> This change has not been uploaded yet, so we still have time to
> reconsider. But please make sure that you have read and understood the
> problem and the arguments from #439389 first.

Moving the plugins to a separate package is definitely a good idea, but
removing functionality in a library package is called breaking the ABI,
and it requires a change in the package name.

 .''`.           Josselin Mouette        /\./\
: :' :           josselin.mouette@ens-lyon.org
`. `'                        joss@debian.org
  `-  Debian GNU/Linux -- The power of freedom

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message =?ISO-8859-1?Q?num=E9riquement?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?_sign=E9e?=

Reply to: