Re: RFS: unetbootin
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 11.12.2011 11:11, Eugene V. Lyubimkin wrote:
>> but I disagree with you if you claim
>> that there would be no reason to use debhelper 8 at all.
>
> I didn't say so, see above.
I'm sorry, you are right.
> One more example:
> -8<-
> $ cupt depends akregator | grep libc6
> Depends: libc6 (>= 2.1.3)
> ->8-
> Lenny has libc6 2.7.
[..]
> Huh? So, packages which had a debhelper compat level of 7 in some
> Lenny/Squeeze development time were fine because 7 was the "recommended
> compat level" but they suddenly became "old crap which is known to be
> broken" now?
you seem to misunderstand my argument. We have dependencies to express
package relations. You (or dpkg-shlipdeps in this case) claims a program
would need libc6 (>= 2.1.3). It does so by determining the minimal
version providing all symbols your program needs.
That's all right and it would be an error to artificially raise any
dependency without actual need to do so.
Note, I was outlining debhelper's compatibility levels are a different
case though. They aren't declaring any dependency - we already have a
better method to express them, including build dependencies to a given
debhelper version itself.
Debhelper's compatibility level is an orthogonal approach. It's a
promise that your build procedures do _not_ break when using certain
features. If you are building a package with debhelper 8.9.something
installed which has, say, debhelper compat 4, debhelper disables certain
features, behaviors and so on it would use or enforce otherwise. It does
not imply at all you would need debhelper 8.9.x to build it.
Hence, I advertise people to use debhelper compat 8 in source packages
where a package is known to work in that compatibility level. It does
not mean "Hey, my package needs debhelper 8.x", but "My package is known
to work with debhelper 8". For the same reason I discourage debhelper
compatibility level 9 by the way. You can't guarantee your package won't
break in that level as it is not finalized yet.
In most cases you would still need to declare a build dependency for a
given debhelper version because some features you use require it. That's
not directly related to the compatibility levels though. The
fact Lintian encourages you to raise the build depends of debhelper
along your compatibility level is feasible, but not a real requirement
in many cases.
- --
with kind regards,
Arno Töll
IRC: daemonkeeper on Freenode/OFTC
GnuPG Key-ID: 0x9D80F36D
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/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=TPKP
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: