Sveicieni!
Notveru mirkli, ka ir skatita maneeja profila
foto portala http://www.kintija.info
Baigais paldies par ekstru! (meitenem tas ir svarigi!)
Buchinjas (jaukas) tev!
Skolastika
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-policy-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe.
On Mon, Feb 21, 2011 at 07:42:32PM -0600, Raphael Geissert wrote:
Hi everyone, Roger,
Roger Leigh has filed a few bug reports related to how the buildd's resolver
(either internal or any of the new ones: apt{,itude}) and I'm not sure I
quiet agree.
Let's take for example the one filed
Roger Leigh writes (Re: re buildd's resolver and package's build deps):
Taking one of php5's dependencies as an example:
libdb-dev (= 4.7) | libdb4.8-dev | libdb4.6-dev
This dependency permits building against no less than *three* different
Berkeley DB versions. Given that these
On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 05:21:17PM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
Roger Leigh writes (Re: re buildd's resolver and package's build deps):
Taking one of php5's dependencies as an example:
libdb-dev (= 4.7) | libdb4.8-dev | libdb4.6-dev
This dependency permits building against no less than
Roger Leigh writes (Re: re buildd's resolver and package's build deps):
I agree that these do serve a useful purpose for these uses, and that
ease of reuse backporting and other types of porting are important.
However, there is no way to know which of those alternatives applies
to which suite.
On Tue, 22 Feb 2011 17:08:18 +, Roger Leigh wrote:
· Standard alternative use in the form concrete|virtual, as used for
normal deps on virtual packages. Is this sensible?
· Architecture-specific dependencies
· Broken uses. Dependencies on multiple different libraries which will
On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 06:49:21PM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
Roger Leigh writes (Re: re buildd's resolver and package's build deps):
I agree that these do serve a useful purpose for these uses, and that
ease of reuse backporting and other types of porting are important.
However, there is no
On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 10:13:19PM +0100, gregor herrmann wrote:
On Tue, 22 Feb 2011 17:08:18 +, Roger Leigh wrote:
· Standard alternative use in the form concrete|virtual, as used for
normal deps on virtual packages. Is this sensible?
· Architecture-specific dependencies
·
On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 10:21:24PM +0100, Bill Allombert wrote:
On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 06:49:21PM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
Roger Leigh writes (Re: re buildd's resolver and package's build deps):
I agree that these do serve a useful purpose for these uses, and that
ease of reuse
On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 22:40:52 +, Roger Leigh wrote:
From discussion on IRC earlier this evening, it looks like the most
pragmatic approach will be to get the apt and aptitude sbuild
resolvers to strip the alternatives (after arch reduction), which
will make them behave pretty much
On Tue, 22 Feb 2011 22:28:05 +, Roger Leigh wrote:
perl (= 5.10) | libmodule-build-perl
Could you please explain what's pointless and/or broken about that
one?
(Except that it's old since even lenny has 5.10.0.
Yes, that's exactly the reason. Because the perl (= 5.10) is
Haij!
Saprotu, ka ir luukota maneejaa profaila
foto portala http://www.klimentina.info
Liels paldies par bildites vertejumu! (meitenem tas ir svarigi!)
Buciishi tev!
Fanija
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-policy-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble?
12 matches
Mail list logo