On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 13:42:39 -0400, Aaron M. Ucko wrote:
> Package: gem2deb
> Version: 0.33.1
> Severity: normal
>
> Please have compiled Ruby extensions depend on compatible versions of
> the ruby metapackage; for instance, an extension built only for 2.3
> would depend on ruby (>= 2.3), ruby (<< 2.4), and an extension built
> for both 2.3 and 2.4 would depend on ruby (>= 2.3), ruby (<< 2.5).
> (Python packaging settled on an analogous approach some time ago.)
> Ideally, this dependency would go to a dedicated ${ruby:Depends}
> substvar, but adding it to ${misc:Depends} would allow for much faster
> adoption.
>
> As it stands, we can get situations like #860512, in which the m68k
> build of telegram-desktop failed because ruby 2.3 wound up paired with
> a ruby-fast-xs installation that only covered 2.2. (The 0.8.0-3+b2
> m68k binNMU was intended to add 2.3 support, but accidentally picked
> up old metapackages.) With an explicit versioned dependency in place,
> generic automated tools would have caught this problem.
>
As this allows broken package combinations, it seems to me the severity
should be serious, not normal.
Cheers,
Julien
