On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 17:12:49 +0200, Hilmar Preusse wrote: > On 26.05.10 Alexey Salmin (alexey.salmin@gmail.com) wrote: > > Hi, > > > Should't this dependency be shown in package dependencies > > not matter how strict or necessary it is? > > Luatex package explicetly depends on zlib1g (>= 1:1.1.4) > > so this implicit dependency on 1.2.3.4 breaks system upgrade: > > > Well, the dep (>= 1:1.1.4) is declared by the zlib1g package itself, > i.e. we just build using the zlib1g-dev package and the dep is > created by itself. We could introduce a conflict against a to new > zlib1g or we could loosen the dep in the source code of luatex itself > (a similar thing was done before). > The dep declared by the zlib1g package works only if its reverse dependencies don't second guess it like luatex does. What is the reason for having this check in the first place? Why can't it be dropped instead of relaxed? Libraries in Debian have ABI guarantees, we don't break ABI without changing the package name. Cheers, Julien
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature