Re: Status report on python2 transition
Gregor Hoffleit <gregor@mediasupervision.de> writes:
> s/not well-behaved/buggy/: Any binary Python extension package that
> doesn't depend on 'python-base >= X.Y, python-base << X.Y+1' is buggy (a
> few weeks ago I asked in debian-python for volunteers that filed bug
> reports against those packages; don't know about the current status,
> though).
There's not much we can do about all the Python packages in stable
that just depend on python-base (>= 1.5.2-1) though, and I don't see
why apt would upgrade to a new version of python-pqueue, for example,
just because someone does "apt-get install python-base" after getting
their shiny new Debian 3.0 CDs.
The only way I can see around this is to scrap python-base and go for
python-base-<major>.<minor>, or for a new name like python-dist-base.
Some sort of python-base-x.y would be nice anyway, for maintainers and
for the packaging system, so that modules can have a simple depends
on a (maybe virtual) package, instead of a versioned depends.
(Does dpkg support versioned virtual packages yet?)
--
Carey Evans http://home.clear.net.nz/pages/c.evans/
"Quiet, you'll miss the humorous conclusion."
Reply to: