On 28 September 2010 00:41, Eino-Ville Talvala <talv...@stanford.edu> wrote: > Hi, > > I have a question about how extras packages not in the user/* hierarchy > interact with the application manager and updating. > > As part of the FCam API, we have a package, fcam-drivers, which replaces the > built-in camera driver modules with slightly modified ones. Previously, I've > been listing it under user/Multimedia, but it's been made clear that that's > against packaging policies, since it's not a end-user application. > > So, when we made a few minor bug fixes to it recently, I changed the section > to 'utils', since there didn't seem to be any guidance on non-user/* section > names, and that's what some other kernel-modifying packages use. I uploaded > fcam-drivers 1.0.7 to extras-devel a few hours ago. > > However, I haven't received any notification in the N900 interface to update > to the new package - I only have extras-devel enabled, and 'apt-cache pkginfo > fcam-drivers' lists the new version 1.0.7. 'apt-get upgrade' does tell me it > will upgrade fcam-drivers, but Application Manager doesn't know about any > updates. > > Is this the expected behavior, or has the section change caused a problem? I > know that non-user/* packages won't show up as installable, but if they don't > appear as updateable either, how do we distribute bugfixes to fcam-drivers, > for example, if the only way end users will get the update is through an > apt-get upgrade?
(correcting accidental off-list reply) H-A-M will never notify you of an update for a package that is outside of user/* so you must upload a new version of fcam with an explicit dependency on the latest version of fcam-drivers. The user would then see an update for fcam, and installing that would force the updated fcam-driver to be installed. You must do this every time you want to update fcam-drivers, even if you didn't modify the fcam package at all. It gets worse if you have multiple packages that depend on some library - you would have to bump every dependent package to make sure everyone gets the update. This is, apparently, by design. -- Alistair Buxton a.j.bux...@gmail.com _______________________________________________ maemo-developers mailing list maemo-developers@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers
