Re: Ruby packaging in wheezy: gem2deb, new policy, etc.
On 27/02/11 at 14:07 +0100, Jérémy Lal wrote:
> On 25/02/2011 01:10, Antonio Terceiro wrote:
> > Lucas Nussbaum escreveu isso aí:
> >> On 30/01/11 at 22:20 -0300, Antonio Terceiro wrote:
> >>> Lucas Nussbaum escreveu isso aí:
> >>>>> a) only native code:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Packages: ruby1.8-foo, ruby-1.9.1 etc
> >>>>>
> >>>>> All of them must provide ruby-foo
> >>>>>
> >>>>> b) both pure-ruby and native code
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Packages:
> >>>>> ruby-foo - contains pure-ruby code
> >>>>> ruby1.8-foo - contains native code for ruby1.8
> >>>>> ruby1.9.1-foo - contains native code for ruby1.9.1
> >>>>>
> >>>>> ruby1.8-foo and ruby1.9.1-foo (etc) depend on ruby-foo
> >>>>>
> >>>>> ruby-foo depend on the version for the default interpreter (so that
> >>>>> installing ruby-foo will get you something that words)
> >>>>
> >>>> I think that we should go for this.
> >>> [...]
> >>>> Could you update the Wiki page? :-)
> >>
> >> Note that this creates a dependency loop. I'm not sure if that's
> >> considered bad or not.
> >
> > Yes, I explicitly noted that when I updated the wiki page. I guess this
> > circular dependency is not critical since it is a very short cycle in
> > the dependency graph (A depends on B or C; B and C depend on A). I also
> > don't see a sane way to avoid this type of dependency in our case.
>
> That rings a bell : http://bugs.debian.org/549442
>
> But if i understand well, those circular dependencies will only last
> during migration to new policy ?
I don't really trust Bill's opinion on this. I've just asked
debian-devel@.
- Lucas
Reply to: