On Wed, Sep 14, 2005 at 05:56:48PM -0500, Chad Walstrom wrote: > Ah, ha! It turns out that this bug is because libpam-ldap in sarge > doesn't have appropriate versioned dependencies on libldap2. I had > recompiled the openldap2 libraries and server on woody to enable SSL > support way back when. Because I used an epoch in the version, it never > got upgraded with the rest of the system to sarge. Still, because > libpam-ldap doesn't have an appropriate versioned dependency, it didn't > generate a conflict when it was installed.
Doesn't that indicate that libpam-ldap *does* have an appropriate versioned dependency, which you violated by versioning your local package with an epoch that's not present in the Debian archive? The shlibs system of shared library handling in Debian depends on monotonically increasing version numbers for packages; representing your library as a "newer" version of an existing Debian package, when it lacks symbols that have been added in later upstream versions, breaks this constraint, but that doesn't make the package's dependencies incorrect. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
