Re: RFC about cosmetic bug whith partial upgrades vs. added symbol versioning
On Fri, 11 Sep 2009, Mike Hommey wrote:
> Now, libxml2 is used a lot. A whole lot. My concern is that partial
> upgrades can possibly leave people with an old libxml2 and newer
> programs (they could even put themselves in this situation by pinning
> some packages), in which case these warnings are going to show up.
>
> Do you think it would be better to force all rdeps to depend on the
> newer libxml2 by the means of shlibs/symbols file so that we avoid this
> possibility, or leaving this known "bug" should be fine?
The lesser-user-annoyance path is to use shlibs to force any new packages to
have a versioned dep on the libxml2-with-symbol-versions pacakges, yes.
--
"One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring
them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond
where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot
Henrique Holschuh
Reply to: