On Tue, Jun 14, 2005 at 11:09:14AM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> No you don't. You have one per entry in the sources.list. As I said
> even the same version can make apt-get build-dep fail. Two versions,
> like when you just uploaded a new one that a local mirror doesn't have
> yet or users with stable/testing/unstable entries, makes apt always fail.
I made some test with current unstable apt and "apt-get build-dep". I
set up a local repository of packages. First I tried to store there a
version of ocaml (providing the virtual package on which several other
packages build depend on) greater than that in unstable. In that case
apt-get build-dep indeed fails.
Then I tried to store in the repository the same version of ocaml than
that in unstable. In this case apt-get build-dep work properly.
Summarizing:
I see no problem with autobuilders and virtual build-dependencies since
they're supposed to be configured with just unstable repositories.
However, to be kind to users it would be better to do as you suggest (a
real metapackage) so that they can happily live with an additional local
apt repository.
Do you know if there are plans to fix this behaviour in future versions
of apt? The expected behaviour for it should be to choose the greater
version if several version of a single package provide a virtual
package.
Cheers.
--
Stefano Zacchiroli -*- Computer Science PhD student @ Uny Bologna, Italy
zack@{cs.unibo.it,debian.org,bononia.it} -%- http://www.bononia.it/zack/
If there's any real truth it's that the entire multidimensional infinity
of the Universe is almost certainly being run by a bunch of maniacs. -!-
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature