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

Re: JPEG 8 transition

Hello Bill,

Bill Allombert [2010-02-14 10:18 +0100]:
> The first step is to fix packages that Depend on 'libjpeg62-dev'.  They should
> Depend on 'libjpeg-dev' instead. Please do not make them Depend on
> 'libjpeg8-dev', or 'libjpeg-dev|libjpeg62-dev' or 'libjpeg-dev|libjpeg8-dev' or
> other combinaisons since this is useless and can only cause problem is the
> future.

This sounds wrong, though. So far it has been good practice (and
lintian complains about it, too) to specify a real dependency first,
and only then a virtual alternative; and for libraries it seems like
an abuse of virtual packages to me in the first place:

 * If these were, and are expected to, keep API backwards
   compatibility, the binary package should be called libjpeg-dev,
   without any virtual packages. Then a simple binNMU would be enough.

 * If/once they break API, they should get a name like libjpeg8-dev,
   but then of course a virtual libjpeg-dev would be wrong.

Thanks, and have a nice weekend,


P.S. Please keep me in CC, I'm not subscribed.

Martin Pitt                        | http://www.piware.de
Ubuntu Developer (www.ubuntu.com)  | Debian Developer  (www.debian.org)

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: