On Tue, Aug 14, 2007 at 11:41:53AM +0100, Alistair Crooks wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 13, 2007 at 02:58:46PM +0200, Dieter Baron wrote:
> > In article <20070813125439.GI25791@nef.pbox.org> Alistair wrote:
> > : On Mon, Aug 13, 2007 at 01:18:34AM +0200, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
> > : FWIW, I think we need new Mesa7-based packages in addition to our
> > : existing Mesa6-based ones, and to gradually migrate apps to 7 as
> > : and when we can.
> > 
> >   That only works well if versions 6 & 7 can be installed
> > simultaneously.  Is that the case?  Or do we have to make that
> > possible within pkgsrc?
> 
> We've had incompatible packages (usually different versions)
> sitting side by side in pkgsrc for a long time. There are
> various reasons for this (differences in database layout with
> postgresql and aide), different licences (coda, probably others),
> different maintainers, etc

  Yes, but none of those are libraries.  The part I'm worried about is
``gradually migrate apps to 7 as and when we can''.  That would mean
that apps that still use 6 and apps that are already switched to 7
cannot be installed at the same time.  That's why I don't think this
is a good approach.


> >   Also, all concerns raised by Blair were about the update itself, not
> > about incompatibilities with packages depending on Mesa.  Are there
> > incompatibilities (to be expected)?
> 
> Not that I know of, but reverting the update and doing it in a
> controlled manner would be my preferred option. I don't see any
> reason to do a Big Bang approach to upgrading this one, but you
> obviously know something I don't, so I'll trust your judgement
> on this one.

  See above: If we want to have them side by side in pkgsrc, they
should not conflict.

> I would like it coordinated with other changes
> that Blair has in the works, though.

  Yes, me too.  My preferred approach would be to get Blair's packages
in wip into shape so they can replace the version 6 packages.  Blair,
what's left to do?

						yours,
						dillo