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

conglomeration packages (Re: Will nvidia-graphics-drivers ever transition to testing?)

Le May 13, 2008 09:39:38 am Lennart Sorensen, vous avez écrit :
> On Mon, May 12, 2008 at 09:42:31PM -0400, Filipus Klutiero wrote:
> > No, a more frequent change is disabling/enabling modules [on some arch].
> > Even if you were right, adding new module packages doesn't "justify"
> > updating other modules. Reusing the ice* example, suppose that Debian
> > would have such an icezoo source package and Mozilla would release a new
> > IRC client. Adding, say, icebear, to the packages generated by icezoo
> > wouldn't make me happy, because I'd have to update iceweasel even if I
> > wouldn't use icebear. Otherwise, I wouldn't like iceweasel updates to be
> > blocked just because icebear has a serious regression.
> You can't compare something stupid like that, with something useful like
> building the kernel modules.
Packaging icebear wouldn't necessarily be useless. I defined it as yet another 
IRC client for the sake of the example. You can imagine it as yet another 
media player if you think that's more useful.

Reply to: