Re: purge_ld_conf.pl [Was: Re: the move to stublib]
On Wed, Sep 11, 2002 at 11:25:37AM +0200, Denis Barbier wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 11, 2002 at 09:40:09AM +0200, Sven LUTHER wrote:
> [...]
> > > Testing whether this directory exist should be enough, isn't it?
> >
> > It doesn't solve the case where a package has a valid reason for having
> > an empty directory.
>
> It does, entry is not removed if directory exist.
Ok, i didn't notice this change from stefano's proposal.
> [...]
> > Well, but if you fix it once, and then the user install a broken library
> > package after the clenup script was run, it will be broken again.
>
> But it can't happen with 'apt-get dist-upgrade' due to dependencies,
No, it can't happen, only if everyone rebuild the current libraries.
> I also have another argument in favor of the quick removal of dh_ocamlld
> and friends.
> Imagine when sarge is released in 2 years an OCaml user which gives
Hey, wasn't sarge supposed to be the proof that we can do quick
releases, and happen in 6 month or such ???
> Debian a try. He is told that OCaml dll path is managed by 3 files,
> and wondered: "Hey, these guys are crazy, upstream states that all
> libraries must go in a well defined place, so what is this crap?".
> We were complaining that this issue had to be solved upstream, so if
> it is we should not introduce more complexity than needed.
Ok, ...
This is a good argument.
I will implement this solution nextly.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
Reply to: