Re: renaming a library package (advice and sanity check)
On Fri, 14 Jan 2005, Jay Berkenbilt wrote:
> Renaming the packages now will create a minor nuisance: the small
> number of users of the package will have to learn a new name for the
> package, ftp-masters will have to remove these packages that they just
> approved, and the vips packages will have to go through NEW again. On
> the other hand, it's better to fix this now than later.
>
> Should I do this rename? I think I should because the cost is low
> (since there are few users) and it's better to do it right.
IMHO, yes.
> I've read Section 5.9.3 of the developer's reference and understand it
> clearly. Is that still the best way to go?
Not always, unfortunately. Very often, the upgrade will be smoother if
you use empty dummy packages wisely. It's a pity that developer's
reference does not mention dummy packages.
For example, you can create a dummy (empty) libvips7.10-doc which
depends on libvips-doc and has section: oldlibs. Then libvips-doc does
not need to conflict with every version of libvips7.10-doc, only with
the non-dummy versions.
This way, "apt-get upgrade" will install libvips-doc without requiring
"apt-get dist-upgrade", and this will be done automatically and
without user intervention,
The bad thing about an upgrade requiring "apt-get dist-upgrade" is
that it is often needed to remove an installed package. Users are
not always sure that this is the right thing to do and we have
to document it in the already long release notes.
If we can make the upgrade to happen just by doing "apt-get upgrade",
users will have to read less the release notes. They just have to
remove the dummy packages after the upgrade, which is a very easy
thing to do with the help of deborphan.
Reply to: