On Mon, Nov 20, 2023 at 12:05:46AM +0100, Hilmar Preuße wrote: > On 11/19/23 00:40, Adrian Bunk wrote: > > Hi Adrian,
Hi Hilmar, > > A proper fix would be either to: > > 1. patch the version check out of texlive-bin (preferred), or > > > Did so, see [1]. I did not remove the check completely, I just un-tightened > the version. I can confirm that a texlive package linked on testing (zlib > 1.2.x) is installable on unstable (zlib 1.3.x). I hope this solves the issue > for the next 20 years. I intend to upload new packages tomorrow, this NMU > bug can be closed, once this has been done. > > I just noticed that we had this issue already 13 years ago. [2] And from then zlib1g still has the Breaks: texlive-binaries (<< 2009-12) that will also require updating again. Is there any reason why the check exists at all? If the only effect is breakage every 10-20 years, then it's wrong to keep it. This check would make sense if zlib would make buggy changes where the ABI changes without chaning the library soname, but that is not supposed to happen and if it would happen with a library as widely used as zlib then so much would break in unstable that the revert would be instant. > Hilmar >... cu Adrian
