Re: Automatic Debug Packages
On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 05:50:50PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Peter Samuelson <email@example.com> writes:
> > [Emilio Pozuelo Monfort]
> >> We haven't agreed on whether there should be one ddeb per source or
> >> per binary package, so I would leave this still opened.
> > Maybe I'm losing track of things here, but it seems to me that everyone
> > except you is saying one ddeb per binary. And then you say "sure, we
> > could do that if we need to". How many times has this happened so far
> > in the thread? I haven't been keeping count.
> Joerg was also advocating one ddeb per source package in the summary
> message that he sent about the ftp-master approach, and Emilio has
> mentioned a few times that ftp-master needs to buy in on that decision
> (which I agree with). I'm not sure if I'm missing some concern from the
> ftp-master side.
So if we have one ddeb per source package, which generates multiple
binary .debs for different libraries --- say, libext2fs, libcom_err,
and libss, to take a completely random example --- and the user
installs different versions of said libraries coming from different
versions of the source package, won't there be a problem if there is
only a single ddeb per source package? I assume you can't install
multiple ddebs coming from different source packages at the same time,
since the pathnames would conflict, right?