[OndÅej Surý] > I did reply you: > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=621460#34 > > and you didn't respond from that time at all.
Yes, your reply was: | I thing it is reasonable that in your case it's probably better to | either depend directly on libdb5.1-dev + db5.1-util (and db4.8-util) | or on libdb-dev (>= 5.1), libdb-dev (<< 5.2), db-util (>= 5.1), | db-util (<< 5.2)." I agree (which is why I didn't reply). That is what I will do, but it is not what your NMU did. > There's really no reason to depend on specific libdbX.Y-dev version > and dbX.Y-util, you would only break the ability to do binNMUs when > needed to switch the default db version in the unstable archive. Correct. I don't want the DB version to change with a binNMU! If that were true, it would mean the new version, and the upgrade, has not been tested! I have good historical reason to believe that each new DB version _does_ need to be tested. 4.2 -> 4.3 -> 4.4 was quite unpleasant, and I don't trust Oracle not to do that again. Peter -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
