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

Re: Package name



On Sun, May 22, 2005 at 01:07:38PM +0300, Shachar Shemesh wrote:
> >>Another thing that comes up is an incompatibility between the deb 
> >>currently provided by the site (as well as binaries compiled with 
> >>libargtable compiled from source) and the deb we would provide. Binaries 
> >>compiled with the former two will depend on "libargtable2.so", while 
> >>binaries compiled with the later will depend on "libargtable2.so.0". I 
> >>can fix it by including the symlink from libargtable2.so to 
> >>libargtable2.so.0 in the non-dev package, I think. Will it work?

> >If you include that symlink in the non-dev package, you have the same
> >problem as before with packages needing to conflict with one another.  That
> >being the case, I don't think you have any responsibility to work around
> >upstream's broken .debs in your Debian packages.

> Lost you there. If the symlink is there for the non-dev, who am I 
> conflicting with? Assuming I make sure that libargtable2 is not 
> installable while argtable2 is on the machine (by either doing 
> "conflicts" or providing an upgrade package), what are the risks? Even 
> if some future version of argtable introduces versioning, the dev 
> package always depends on the non dev of the precise same version, so it 
> seems I'm not blocking any future upgrade path here.

The risk is that you can't install the new -dev package on a system that has
the old lib installed, because they conflict.  One normally wants to be able
to build and test binaries for a new library *before* purging the old
version of the library...

-- 
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: