On Feb 26, 2005, at 6:08 PM, David R. Morrison wrote:
OK, in my opinion, this behavior as reported by Robert indicates that the
buildlock system is not yet working as it should.
It's working fine, it's catching a bug in Fink right away rather than later. :-)
Fink is "supposed" to be able to switch back and forth among db3 vs. db42,
or ncurses5 vs. libncurses5. So shouldn't we be trying to restore the
dependencies of the buildlock package, instead of just refusing to install
it?
Fink never did this properly. In one invocation, it can accomplish precisely ONE switch between replaceable packages, and sometimes it even does that wrong. At least now we're not letting it pass when it could cause an error.
(For example, we could add each new deb to the scanpackages database
just after it's built, and then ask apt-get (rather than dpkg) to install
the buildlock... which would "put back" a .deb that just got removed,
presumably.)
That's one idea. I was under the impression that Justin's shlibs changes in post-0.24 would be re-calculating dependencies before and after each build, which is another way to solve this issue. Am I right or wrong about that?
Dave
PGP.sig
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
