Sean Whitton <spwhit...@spwhitton.name> writes: > Hello, > > On Tue 04 Mar 2025 at 11:32pm -08, Xiyue Deng wrote: > >> Sean Whitton <spwhit...@spwhitton.name> writes: >> >>> Hello Xiyue, >>> >>> Thanks. >>> >>> What if we add a Breaks to Emacs in trixie saying it's incompatible with >>> dh-elpa-helper <<2.1.7 ? >>> >>> The following situation is what could break an upgrade: >>> - emacs upgraded to version from trixie >>> - dh-elpa-helper still on the version from bookworm >>> - an addon gets upgraded, and tries to bytecompile. >>> >>> But a Breaks would mean dpkg would ensure the first two conditions are >>> never true. >>> >>> Then we do indeed do a backport of dh-elpa to bookworm-backports so that >>> Emacs in backports remains installable. >>> >>> No stable update needed. >>> >> >> This does sound appealing. But I think currently dh-elpa requires >> Emacs >=1:30.1+1. Will this cause some kind of a circular dependency >> that may break upgrades? >> >> If that's the case, I think we can change the handling in dh-elpa[1] to >> work for both 30 and older releases, and we can loosen that requirement >> so that it can upgrade before Emacs 30.1. > > Our dependencies system is meant to be able to handle this sort of case. > It can unpack both packages first before configuring either of them. > See Policy 7.3. >
Ah, sounds good. This may work and doesn't require a stable update. Also I think technically we only need a "Breaks: dh-elpa (<< 2.1.2)" so that it won't further complicate the dh-elpa migration. > -- > Sean Whitton -- Regards, Xiyue Deng
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
