"Jonas Karlsson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, 16 Aug 2007 05:50:33 +0200, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 8/15/07, Jonas Karlsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> An old issue that I just encountered, is that depencencies in the old > >> format > >> "Foo x.y" is interpreted as just "Foo" while it really should be > >> interpreted > >> as "Foo >= x.y" imo. [...] > > > > This has been discussed in the past (offlist, perhaps) and André > > decided for the current behavior. IIRC his rationale was that the ">=" > > behavior would force too many unnecessary upgrades as the recipe > > writer is usually beyond the lower bound of the recipe. > > This exact discussion was most probably offlist. I really see the problem with > using ">=". [...] > This far we've only heard mine and André's view on this. Doesn't anyone else > has > an opinion in this?
I agree with André's view, where Foo x.y is informative but not a >= dependency. However, as you noted, Gobo is a hardy thing, so it's not a major problem for me if it goes either way. Regards, -- MJ Ray - see/vidu http://mjr.towers.org.uk/email.html Experienced webmaster-developers for hire http://www.ttllp.co.uk/ Also: statistician, sysadmin, online shop builder, workers co-op. Writing on koha, debian, sat TV, Kewstoke http://mjr.towers.org.uk/ _______________________________________________ gobolinux-devel mailing list gobolinux-devel@lists.gobolinux.org http://lists.gobolinux.org/mailman/listinfo/gobolinux-devel
