On 2017-03-07 at 08:12, Svante Signell wrote: > On Tue, 2017-03-07 at 06:49 -0500, The Wanderer wrote: > >> On 2017-03-04 at 14:19, Svante Signell wrote: > ... >>> Maybe I don't understand. The version of xpdf I'm proposing is no >>> longer dependent on poppler. So why are you talking about >>> poppler? >> >> Because other packages do still depend on poppler, so we can't >> drop poppler from the repositories, which means that introducing >> the code back into the xpdf package itself will mean we have two >> (divergent) copies of that code - with all the problems that >> implies. > > Sorry, I still don't get it: - Which packages still depend on > poppler, unless via xpdf? The ones directly dependant on poppler are > not affected. Yes, they are; if a newly-discovered bug which exists in both codebases is fixed in xpdf but not in poppler, those packages will still be affected by the bug. Thus, introducing non-poppler-based xpdf back into the archive means any such bugs will have to be fixed in two places rather than in one; this is the downside which I understand to be part of the objection, and part of the reason for splitting out the poppler code into separate packages in the first place. Unless you're saying that the divergence between poppler and upstream xpdf is so extreme that talking about the same bug existing in both codebases is not meaningful - in which case this objection disappears entirely, and I apologize for the false trail. > - Which repositories containing poppler code are you talking about? The Debian repositories which contain the packages found by 'apt-cache search poppler'. (Thinking about it now, I think the term "archive" might be more usual than "repositories" for the meaning I intended.) > - Which code has to be brought back to the xpdf package, causing > problems? Isn't it enough to bump the upstream version and go on from > there, as Adam suggested? The code which is in the upstream version but which has been split out of the Debian version into the poppler packages. Reverting xpdf to the upstream codebase, rather than basing it on poppler, brings this code back in implicitly. > - I did a search for reverse dependencies for xpdf (there are no > build-rdeps) > apt-cache rdepends xpdf > > xpdf-dbgsym : obvious > libfontconfig1 : Breaks: xpdf (<= 3.03-11) > valentina : Depends: ..., xpdf, ... <snip> Did you build this list manually, or is this actual output of the above command? Because the output I get from 'apt-cache rdepends' is of a very different format, and one which might well be considered less useful. -- The Wanderer The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man. -- George Bernard Shaw
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature