Re: Lintian trunk: ready for release?
On Sun, Feb 15, 2004 at 12:57:41PM +0100, Frank Lichtenheld wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 15, 2004 at 01:52:29AM +0100, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Since r40, I think lintian trunk is ready for release. But first,
> > testing is needed.
>
> I'm not happy with the current deb-format thingy. Why don't we depend
> on libarchive-tar-perl? I find the message that is output for every
> binary package annoying. I would just depend on libarchive-tar-perl
> and go for it. Or at least only print the message in verbose mode.
> Why choose you the current solution? (Or did I just miss a mail
> with the reasoning?)
Dependency is okay w.r.t. me, although lintian should have as few
depends as possible. It had no particular very good reason, except that
lintian does work mostly without that lib, so a depends might be
considered overkill. (Recommends is better thatn suggests however).
Having a _versioned_ depends however means that one cannot lintian check
libarchive-tar-perl.
How about: depends libarchive-tar-perl, recommends libarchive-tar-perl
(>=0.99) (the version with the required Archive::Tar::File), and making
lintian fail with a warning like it does now on outdated
libarchive-tar-perl version (shouldn't happen unless mixing
unstable/testing lintian with stable libs)?
That is my preferred solution, second best: versioned recommends without
depends. When the broken tar version is far away, and no broken .deb's
exist, the check could either be dropped, or reverted to current
behaviour-without-warning-when-libarchive-tar-perl.
> I made the suggest versioned since this is true whatever solution we
> take.
Good catch, noticed that today too.
--Jeroen
--
Jeroen van Wolffelaar
Jeroen@wolffelaar.nl (also for Jabber & MSN; ICQ: 33944357)
http://Jeroen.A-Eskwadraat.nl
Reply to: