Subject: Re: When DEPENDS can be upgraded in place
To: Frederick Bruckman <email@example.com>
From: None <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 09/07/2000 01:55:01
On Wed, 6 Sep 2000, Frederick Bruckman wrote:
> > OK, and what do you suggest then? Tell them that a lib of <newer version>
> > would be required, judging from information encoded in the (new) "app"
> > pkg?
> Yes, and also update the DEPENDS in the app pkgsrc (if it isn't fixed
> already), and delete the app binary package with the broken dependency
> from the server. [We shouldn't say "app" depends on lib>=1.1 unless
> "app" built against lib-1.2 is known to work with lib-1.1. I don't
> want to lay a heavy "burden of proof" on the pkgsrc maintainer though,
> I just want a way to fix it when someone reports a problem.]
No. What you propose here is wrong, see all the discussion about
wildcards. Adding fixed DEPENDS is a bigger source of problems than adding
wildcard depends by default.
> > And if so, assuming that the information which depends _exactly_ a
> > pkg was compiled against is only used for user information, how do the
> > users get this information? Printed automatically? When?
> "tar xf pkg-x.tgz '+BUILD_DEPENDS'" is good enough for me. The
> information is for the maintainers of the binary package collection,
> not for the user.
Heh, it might be good enough for you, but it's not really user
friendly. Some switch needs to be added to pkg_info for this to work, see
Hubert Feyrer <email@example.com>