Subject: Re: When DEPENDS can be upgraded in place
To: David Brownlee <email@example.com>
From: Frederick Bruckman <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 09/08/2000 08:47:25
On Fri, 8 Sep 2000, David Brownlee wrote:
> We have two dependencies - the existing build dependencies, and
> the 'binary' set.
> eg: build may be lib>=1.1, and if you build against 1.1 then
> then binary dependencies are lib>=1.1. But if you build against
> 1.2 then binary dependencies should be lib>=1.2
Ahh. That's an idea worth considering. So for dependencies on
libraries, we would prefer ">=" wildcards to "-*" wildcards?
I'm also concerned about what happens when the library evolves to the
point where it finally breaks backwards compatability. The only thing
we can do for that, I think, is to compile a database of binary
packages which are affected. It's not enough to just remove them from
the server, because users could have them already on their hard
drives, or pressed onto a CD.