On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 11:07:33PM +0000, Tim Retout wrote: > On Wed, 2009-12-23 at 13:19 -0800, Ryan Niebur wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 04:09:43PM -0500, Jonathan Yu wrote: > > > On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 3:50 PM, Tim Retout <t...@retout.co.uk> wrote: > > > > So we need to tighten up the Depends to match the version of Perl that > > > > libdevel-cover-perl was compiled against. > > > I get these warnings too, and have always considered them more of an > > > annoyance than a bug. I have been thinking about how to deal with this > > > issue, but I have not come up with an elegant solution that would suit > > > our purpose. I'd love to hear about this from the rest of the group. > > > > > > > lets just binnmu them as we find them? > > Yes to this. > > But to spot these more easily in the future, we can add some magic to > debian/rules and debian/control to force the dependency. They'll still > need a binNMU, but I suspect that some automated/manual mechanisms will > pick this up sooner if it causes an installability problem (hopefully > without having to involve pkg-perl at all). > > It's only a trivial annoyance with 5.10.0 and 5.10.1, but with future > jumps it could break stuff, in the worst case. >
we already have dh_perl which sets perl:Depends for us. perhaps it could be extended for cases like this to make the dependency break with new upstream perl versions. I wonder, is there any way we can tell (from code) that it needs to have the stricter dependencies? -- _________________________ Ryan Niebur ryanrya...@gmail.com
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
