Re: cameleon: byte or native?

[Sven Luther <luther@dpt-info.u-strasbg.fr>]

On Wed, Nov 27, 2002 at 10:24:46AM +0100, Jérôme Marant wrote:
> Sven Luther wrote:
> 
> >On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 11:09:14PM +0100, Jérôme Marant wrote:
> > 
> >
> >>Sven Luther <luther@dpt-info.u-strasbg.fr> writes:
> >>
> >>   
> >>
> >>>>So, what I really need is that both Stefano and me make up our
> >>>>minds and not to change afterwards.
> >>>>       
> >>>>
> >>>I don't really think a little delay in uploading is any big problem,
> >>>also the ftp master process more quickly a just a package addition than
> >>>a new package.
> >>>     
> >>>
> >>Yes, but I'd like it not to happen all the time.
> >>   
> >>
> >
> >Then just build everything as both nativecode and bytecode.
> >
> 
> Yes. However, some problem comes to my mind:
> 
> The main cameleon package depends on the remaining cameleon
> packages (zoggy, report, and so on). These dependencies are
> versioned. Since versioned provides do not exist, this
> native/bytecode sceme will not work properly since nothing
> is currently able to check those versions.
> 
> I could add a pseudo verioned Provides:  but since I usually use
> CVS snapshots for bug fixes, it might be a bit overkilling to have
> Provides: zoggy-1.2+cvs.2002XXXX
> 
> Any idea ?

Fix dpkg so it handles versioned provides ?

More seriously, if it is only for the cameleon package, you could do :

Depends: zoggy (= 1.2+cvsxxx) | zoggy-byte (= 1.2+cvsxxx)

And so on. This is not a nice solution, but it solves this problem.

BTW, i choose the -byte suffix for bytecode programs, do you think this
is a good choice ?

Friendly,

Sven Luther