"Jeroen T. Vermeulen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Sun, February 12, 2006 18:52, Roger Leigh wrote: >> >>> One small thing--I may have asked this before, but should we really have >>> a >>> build dependency on such a recent version of libpq? Any version from >>> 7.3 >>> or so onwards should do for a working libpq. >> >> This is the version present in Debian at the moment (testing and >> unstable). If you would prefer it to work with stable (sarge), then >> the depdenncy on postgresql-dev, rather than libpq-dev is what you >> need, in which case you can just revert the those changes in >> debian/control.in (Depends and Build-Depends). > > I don't mean to interfere with your Debian packaging in any way, so I > don't want to make any changes there when I'm not 100% sure of what I'm > doing. I'm just wondering if there's any need for the build dependency to > be so strict. Wouldn't something like "either postgresql-dev >= 7.3 or > any version of libpq-dev" be enough to get a fully functional build?
It would work for the Build-Depends, but not for the Depends (because
it would let you build against 8.1, and then install the 7.3 headers
when you install libpqxx-dev, which will probably break). If this was
a build dependency alone, this approach would be fine.
> Of course Debian policy may set further goals for the build dependencies
> beyond just getting a functional build, which is why I'm not 100% sure
> what I'd be doing if I interfered with your packaging here.
We (Debian) are being stricter than necessary, by depending upon
what's current in Debian to ensure that the -dev package will always
work with the exact version of libpq it was built against. This is
the one place we do differ slightly in our requirements.
Unfortunately, because of the package renaming, I don't there's a
clean way of relaxing the dependency (normally, version numbers would
be sufficient). As a result, I think you need to choose between
1) >= 7.3 (postgresql-dev; stable)
2) >= 8.0 (libpq-dev; testing/unstable)
It's probably fine to stick with stable, since I will be providing the
packages in unstable in any case (depending on how stable they are,
probably after 3.0, but possibly before if you think it's ready for
use).
Regards,
Roger
--
Roger Leigh
Printing on GNU/Linux? http://gutenprint.sourceforge.net/
Debian GNU/Linux http://www.debian.org/
GPG Public Key: 0x25BFB848. Please sign and encrypt your mail.
pgprVF2914jcK.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Libpqxx-general mailing list [email protected] http://gborg.postgresql.org/mailman/listinfo/libpqxx-general
