Re: Multiarch file overlap summary and proposal (was: Summary: dpkg shared / reference counted files and version match)
Guillem Jover writes ("Re: Multiarch file overlap summary and proposal (was: Summary: dpkg shared / reference counted files and version match)"):
> On Tue, 2012-02-14 at 14:28:58 +0000, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > I think the refcounting approach is very worthwhile because it
> > eliminates unnecessary work (by human maintainers) in many simple
> > cases.
> Aside from what I said on my other reply, I just wanted to note that
> this seems to be a recurring point of tension in the project when it
> comes to archive wide source package changes, where supposed short
> term convenience (with its usually long term harmful effects) appears
> to initially seduce people over what seems to be the cleaner although
> slightly a bit more laborious solution.
The refcnt doesn't just eliminate unnecessary multiarch
conversion work. It also eliminates unnecessary maintenance effort.
Maintaining a split package will be more work than without.
I think that over the lifetime of the multiarch deployment this extra
packaging work will far outweigh the extra maintenance and
documentation burden of the refcnt feature.
> [...] But trying to workaround this by coming
> up with stacks of hacked up solutions [...]
I disagree with your tendentious phrasing. The refcnt feature is not
a "hacked up solution" (nor a stack of them). It is entirely normal
in Debian core tools (as in any substantial piece of software serving
a lot of diverse needs) to have extra code to make it easier to deploy
or use in common cases simpler.