Dear Chris, Thanks for your interests in android related packages!
On Sun, Aug 25, 2024 at 11:34 PM Chris Hofstaedtler <z...@debian.org> wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 26, 2024 at 08:26:11AM +0200, Chris Hofstaedtler wrote: > > On Sun, Aug 25, 2024 at 09:14:53PM -0700, Roger Shimizu wrote: > > > related to #1062209, and #1062110 > > > so aligning with the same way to the bug report. > > > > > > [ copy the email from Hans ] > > > > > > Thanks for reporting! In the Android Tools case, the shared libs and > > > packages > > > that use them are packaged together, often from the same source package, > > > so I > > > can't see why we'd need special versions of it. And when we need to, we > > > can use > > > strictly versioned depends, so it should be fine. > > > > All of that would be true if the packages involved were using > > strictly versioned depends, but they are not: > > > > Package: aapt > > Source: android-platform-frameworks-base (1:14~beta1-2) > > Depends: android-libaapt, android-libandroidfw, [...] > > > > At least I don't see an "(= 1:14~beta1-2)" constraint here. Strong relations like : (= 1:14~beta1-2) can only be used within the same package. > Oh, and while you can do that going forward, you also need to > break/conflict with all old versions. > > Maybe you should rethink if this is a good strategy. Do you have other ideas? Please let me know if you have better way out. Thank you! Cheers, Roger
