> Is it about using library packages from Leap (old) on Tumbleweed (new)? If
> so, I'd argue that is simply invalid and basically what this approach should
> protect against.
It's not *necessarily* invalid.
In Fedora, packages that fail to build from source are eventually retired along
with all of their dependencies, and (basically) everything is rebuilt for every
release, so we wouldn't expect old libraries to mix with new applications,
there. But if SUSE doesn't retire those packages, then they could continue
using an older library package in a new build root, when they build a new
application that depends on an old library.
In the previous version of this PR, the new binary would express a dependency
that the library's package doesn't provide. In this version, packages won't
express that dependency on libraries that don't provide it, because they won't
have a ".elf-version" file.
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2372#issuecomment-2010126829
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Message ID: <rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2372/c2010126...@github.com>
_______________________________________________
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
