On Mon, Jan 27, 2003 at 08:38:51AM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: > On Sat, Jan 25, 2003 at 12:37:57PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote: > > That said, i am not convinced the build dependencies do not cause > > problem also, let's say, i uploaded ocaml 3.06-13, but it has not yet > > been built for arch foo. then i upload lablgl 0.99.1 and set the build > > depends as you propose. That means i will have to use build depends > > ocaml (>= 3.06-13), ocaml (<< 3.07) or something such ? > > > > The ocaml (>= 3.06-13) is needed so that lablgl will not build on the > > older ocaml, and is what we achieved by doing the ocaml-3.06-1 thingy, > > right. > > You are right, this can be a problem, but only great changes(TM) > require such a trick, just like the libdir transition. For great changes > all the packages have to be rebuilt anyway, right? ... > > > So, what does everyone think, should we aim at a new policy entry, > > saying that for build dependencies, we depend on the real package, and > > use a single versioned dependency (of the kind >= 3.06-1, >= 3.06-13, > > >= 3.07-1) ? > > IMO we should fallback on >=/<< dependencies for build-dependencies and > keep on using virtual names for dependencies.
But what about using only the >= dependencies and dropping the << ones ? Friendly, Sven Luther
