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

Re: RFR: chromaprint (Adoption)



On Sun, Jan 08, 2012 at 06:01:39PM +0100, Jakub Wilk wrote:
[...]
> 
> As a side note, for extra safety it'd be good to make sure that if
> ever these symbols are used, the generated dependency is either
> unsatisfiable or strictly versioned. Unfortunately, the latter
> option is currently a bit difficult to implement; see bug #615940.
> 
I don't understand how I could generate an unsatisfiable dependency: if
I write an enormous version, it just gets overwritten:

- (regex|optional)"^_ZN?St.*@Base$" 99
+ (regex|optional)"^_ZN?St.*@Base$" 0.6-1

Note that it would solve the "strictly versioned" bit, at the cost of a
systematic lintian error. A bit too ugly for my taste.

As for the smaller version, even if it doesn't exist, there will by
definition always be a valid later version.

Next time, I'll stick to a C library ;-)

Cheers,

Simon

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: