Re: New version of haskell-devscripts
- To: email@example.com
- Subject: Re: New version of haskell-devscripts
- From: Kari Pahula <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Sun, 5 Apr 2009 12:53:59 +0300
- Message-id: <[🔎] 20090405095359.GA7051@piperka.net>
- In-reply-to: <1238518480.3686.29.camel@localhost>
- References: <1237818463.2842.64.camel@zezinho> <1238351421.3638.16.camel@localhost> <20090330084000.GA17113@piperka.net> <1238443145.24591.21.camel@localhost> <20090331103049.GA22934@piperka.net> <1238518480.3686.29.camel@localhost>
On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 04:54:40PM +0000, Joachim Breitner wrote:
> Will it be ok to depend on the -dev package unversioned, or do we
> somehow need to tie it to the version that the haskell package was built
A lower limit on the version may be useful sometimes, but you
shouldn't be using an upper limit.
Unversioned deps on C -dev packages is ok, since that part is taken
care of if you depend on the shared library. Your package will get
uninstallable when the library gets updated and the soname changes.
Someone still having the old shared library version and a haskell
library linking to that around may get broken results when the C -dev
package has a link to a newer shared library version, but that's
something that C developers will need to deal with. Just make sure to
use build-deps with libfoo-dev (>= X) when appropriate and aptitude
upgrade before building anything.