On Mon, 24 Jan 2011, Christian Kastner wrote:
> >> One simple way to resolve this would be to rename the .symbols file
> >> during build and again during clean (or similar approaches); I was
> >> wondering though if anybody had a better approach to recommend?
> > I'd say you need a versioned build dependency on dpkg-dev. This would
> > document that you use that feature, and that backporters need to use a
> > modern dpkg. This is no different from any other build depends you have.
> Indeed -- the lack of a versioned B-D and the consequences were just
> pointed out to me in private communication. Seems obvious, don't know
> why it eluded me.
Yeap -- if the functionality is unconditional -- there must have been
versioning of build-depends on dpkg.
Alternatively, version of dpkg could be lowered and functionality
conditioned on the version of dpkg (thus implementing necessary logic to
support older versions), it would imho be better and more flexible to
please those backport-lovers, saving them and you time going
patching/branching things around.
I guess the best/easiest way to obtain version of dpkg is:
perl -MDpkg -e 'print ${Dpkg::version};'
?
--
=------------------------------------------------------------------=
Keep in touch www.onerussian.com
Yaroslav Halchenko www.ohloh.net/accounts/yarikoptic
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110124161618.go8...@onerussian.com
