On Tue, 01 Jan 2019 18:55:41 +0000, Dominic Hargreaves wrote: > On Sat, Dec 08, 2018 at 04:57:19PM +0100, gregor herrmann wrote: > > On Fri, 07 Dec 2018 17:55:55 +0200, Niko Tyni wrote: > > > No immediate action is required from packages affected by this change, > > > but they can now gradually start moving from the current idiom > > > Depends: perl (>= x) | libfoo-bar-perl (>= y) > > > to just the 'libfoo-bar-perl (>= y)' part. This will need some changes > > > to lintian recommendations as well. > > I've submitted #917967 to drop the outdated recommendation. > (I've also proposed a policy update in #761219). Thanks! > > And a change in libconfig-model-dpkg-perl, and maybe also in > > dh-make-perl. > > There are two modifications that could be made to the logic for > constructing depends relating to dual lived modules: > > 1) remove the alternate depends on perl when a versioned dep is needed > 2) always depend on the virtual package name, regardless of whether a > version is needed > > 2) is appealing because it removes the special casing completely, but > would probably make quite a few fields longer. Maybe with automated > tooling this is okay, though. I'm afraid I still don't understand the options, or more exactly option 2. Option 1 is, I guess, Niko's example from above. Would option 2 then be just 'libfoo-bar-perl'? If so I'd say yes, that was the idea IMO (unless Foo::Bar is included in the oldest perl version in the archive). How would this make "a few fields longer"? > Thoughts? Note: I am not really volunteering to update the tooling, > that's best done with those more familiar with them. Ack. But it seems we need a spec first anyway :) Cheers, gregor -- .''`. https://info.comodo.priv.at -- Debian Developer https://www.debian.org : :' : OpenPGP fingerprint D1E1 316E 93A7 60A8 104D 85FA BB3A 6801 8649 AA06 `. `' Member VIBE!AT & SPI Inc. -- Supporter Free Software Foundation Europe `- NP: Simon and Garfunkel: The Boxer
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital Signature