On Sun, Jul 29, 2007 at 01:53:10PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> - Changing the source name to an unversioned name will make it
> impossible to build two sets of dbX.Y packages at the same time
> (which is required for database updates between two versions). An
> upgrade from 4.6 to 4.7 with the same name scheme is impossible. 4.7
> can change back its source package name to db4.7, but why change it
> all for 4.6?
Another possibility is to fork off a db4.6 package (section oldlibs, no
-dev package) when db goes to 4.7. That way the db4.6-util package will
still be available.
> - It is hard to build depend on a specific libdb4.6-dev version.
> Encoding something like 'libdb-dev (<< 4.7)' will break these
> packages if libdb-dev is upgraded. Please consider to provide a real
> libdb4.6-dev package, plus a libdb-dev package, so packages do have
> the choice for the build dependency.
The entire point was so that packages won't have the choice.
> - libdb4.6++-dev depending on libdb-dev will break on upgrades, so
> even for this reason, you need a libdb4.6-dev (or worse, a
> libdb++-dev).
Alternately, libdb4.6++-dev could be renamed to libdb++-dev.
> The benefit to have a libdb-dev package is to make packaging simpler
> for packages not using transactions, but it makes it much harder for
> the other packages. Suggesting:
>
> - Rename the source package to db4.6.
>
> - Add a libdb4.6-dev package, with libdb-dev depending on
> libdb4.6-dev.
This is barely any improvement over how db4.{2,3,4,5} are handled.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
