Quoting Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > On Mon, Jul 28, 2003 at 09:42:04AM +0200, Jérôme Marant wrote: > > Quoting Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > > > > > Thanks Sven :-) We won a battle. > > > > > > But This does not solve the autobuilder problems, but let us just ignore > > > them for now, since ocaml is already added to the override file for
> > > those. > > > > What problem? > > The auto builders need to know, when presented with a virtual package, > which package to choose or something such. They are not prepared to cope > with virtual packages provided by only one real package, which is why a > manual edited configuration files which maps the virtual packages to the > real ones to choose is used. But since APT can now decide to install a package if it is the only one provided by a virtual package, I guess they don't need to consider this case and can let APT do the job, right? > I had a discussion with Bdale Garbee, while sitting at the same table as > James > Troup, and we agreed that the usage of a virtual package for giving a > package's ABI was a valid one, a bit in the same way that perl has a > virtual package giving its API. So the problem, if there is one, is on > the part of the autobuilder software, not of us, so i guess there is no > problem in just ignoring this, and let the autobuilder maintainers > handle the override file, at least for ocaml. After all, there is just > one such change needed once per year, when a new ocaml is released. We definitely need versioned provides, I think. -------------- Jérôme Marant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
