On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 09:13:50AM +0000, Sylvain Le Gall wrote:
> It is almost the same thing, but I think it is more clear with a (=
> ${binary:Version}).
>
> The main difference, is that in the case of dev -> runtime dependency
> we can have stronger dependency. As you know, there is a probability to
> miss some depends due to the hash/limitation in precision. For this
> deps, we have enough information to set a stronger dependency.
OK, so in fact the (= ${binary:Version}) *is* subsumed by the new
dependency scheme, but it suffers of the usual limitation of
checksums. I don't see keeping (= ${binary:Version}) as the obviously
right solution. For instance, it has the drawback of forcing
reinstallation even when the ABI (according to checksum) has not
changed.
Given that we are relying on ABI checksums anyhow for *inter*-library
dependency, I don't see why we should get paranoid about their
incompleteness for *in*-library dependency.
All in all I'm fore dropping (= ${binary:Version}), what about the
others?
Cheers.
--
Stefano Zacchiroli -o- PhD in Computer Science \ PostDoc @ Univ. Paris 7
zack@{upsilon.cc,pps.jussieu.fr,debian.org} -<>- http://upsilon.cc/zack/
Dietro un grande uomo c'è ..| . |. Et ne m'en veux pas si je te tutoie
sempre uno zaino ...........| ..: |.... Je dis tu à tous ceux que j'aime
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature