Hi, Quoting Raphael Hertzog (2014-08-29 21:16:06) > If that is ever implemented, it must apply only on dependencies that can be > parsed on the source's debian/control because I would not be happy to have > warnings on library dependencies generated by dpkg-shlibdeps.
How can it happen that library dependencies generated by dpkg-shlibdeps create a dependency on a package version older than in old stable? > Also there are quite a few maintainers that believe that correct information > don't do much harm and I have a hard time justifying this change just for the > purpose of bootstrapping a new port. The point 9.1 in > http://lists.debian.org/[email protected] only > mentions "compiler dependencies" so maybe this can be restricted to a smaller > subset (or maybe be an "I" by default but a "W" on the packages where it > matters?). You mean the sentence "Versioned dependencies are problematic for bootstrapping because versioned compiler dependencies have to be translated and the versions of binary packages is not known a priori during a bootstrap from zero." I agree that in retrospect this was not well formulated. There are two issues where versioned dependencies create problems for bootstraps. One is versioned compilers because they have to be translated to their cross variant when cross compiling. The other is all other "versions of binary packages" because they have to be associated to source packages but it cannot be known from which version of a source package they build. On the other hand: 1. If the solution proposed in section 4.1. is uploaded and it turns out that it works actually as reliably as imagined, then translating versioned compiler dependencies will be no problem. It would just mean that those who want to keep their build dependency on gcc (>= 2.95.2) have to change that dependency to gcc-for-build (>= 2.95.2) and/or gcc-for-host (>= 2.95.2) as applicable. 2. In case of versioned dependencies on binary packages greater than pre-oldstable, falling back to the latest source version will not have any differently bad side effects compared to versioned dependencies on binary packages greater than or equal to oldstable. So if (1.) happens to work out, there indeed does not seem to be a strong reason left to have lintian warn about ancient versions. The only other reason I can think of would be that it produces a tiny slowdown to dependency resolvers but that is of course also not a very strong reason. cheers, josch -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
