[Disclaimer: I am not implying that Martin or anybody else is stupid, incompetent, not thorough, or whatever. Rather, I try to participate in a technical discussion. For this, it is usually necessary to ask questions and show problems. Those problems may indeed have solutions, even trivial ones. In which case it certainly won't hurt if those people aware of them simply enlighten me and others. No need to be aggressive, really. End of disclaimer]


Am 31.12.2003 um 21:00 schrieb Martin Costabel:


[...]

One other example is the libfreetype2 package which used to have a buildonly %N package and a shlibs splitoff. We had to transform the %N package into a file-less dummy in order to allow other packages to use the libfreetype2 from X11. Then I had to reintroduce a buildonly -dev splitoff for those packages that need this version, together with a stern warning to only depend on this package when it is really needed.

If my proposal had been realized, we could have left the freetype2 package completely untouched and could just have asked other packages not to BuildDepend on it any more.

Hm, in the light of what Ben Hines that (namely that for 'developers', one can 'hold' packages), does that mean that we essential will start to tell developers (like Ben or me and many others) that they now have to start manually fixing their Fink installation whenever changes like that are made? I mean, since for example I would have to hold those -dev packages mentioned above, that would mean in the alternate world (where we implemented the changes as Martin and Ben suggest them), I would have had to manually fix up my freetype2 installation. Do I understand that right so far?


If so, I am still not quite satisfied with the proposal. Of course I do see the merits - after all it's a reduced/limited version of something I proposed myself in the past (namely, doing all builds in chrooted jails where precisely the packages they need are installed, and nothing else). But there are also drawbacks, which at the very least we should be clearly aware off (that means we should explicitly mention them, like above), and document them, and when possible try to provide work around (like, to stay with the above example, post a guideline for those with -dev packages on hold telling how to manually update freetype2).

Even better of course would be if we had a way to have the benefits of the current proposal without its drawbacks (or at least w/o the major drawback, namely burdening developers).


Cheers,


Max



-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials.
Become an expert in LINUX or just sharpen your skills.  Sign up for IBM's
Free Linux Tutorials.  Learn everything from the bash shell to sys admin.
Click now! http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1278&alloc_id=3371&op=click
_______________________________________________
Fink-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel

Reply via email to