On Thu, Feb 02, 2012 at 11:33:01AM +0100, Mike Hommey wrote: > On Thu, Feb 02, 2012 at 11:14:43AM +0100, Alexander Reichle-Schmehl wrote: > > Hi! > > > > Am 02.02.2012 10:54, schrieb Tanguy Ortolo: > > > Packages can currenctly declared dependencies on specific versions of > > > other packages, with simple relations: <<, <=, =, >= and >>. For > > > instance: > > > Package: xul-ext-adblock-plus > > > Depends: iceweasel (>= 3.6.13) | iceape (>= 2.1) | … > > > > > > While this is sufficient for most cases, it does not cover one > > > interesting case: a dependencies on a range of versions. For instance: > > > Package: xul-ext-adblock-plus > > > Depends: iceweasel (>= 3.6.13, << 12.0~a1+) | iceape (>= 2.1, << > > > 2.9~a1+) | … > > [..] > > > > Isn't that why we have versioned provides? E.g. iceweasel and iceape > > could provide xul-api-3.6 (or whatever), while all the xul-ext packages > > depends on xul-api-3.6. > > > > Isn't the best solution, but seems to be more elegant that the break you > > mentioned. > > There is no such thing as a xul api that iceweasel, iceape and icedove > provide. Sure some parts are common, but some aren't, especially the UI > bits. So in the end, you still need to express a dependency on specific > versions of iceweasel, iceape and icedove.
As discussed on irc, if you instead do iceweasel-api-3.6, iceweasel-api-4.0, etc. you end up having crazy dependencies like: Depends: iceweasel-api-3.6 | iceweasel-api-4.0 | iceweasel-api-5.0 | iceweasel-api-6.0 | ... | iceweasel-api-11.0 | iceape-api-2.1 | iceape-api-2.2 | ... How exactly is that better? Mike -- 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/20120202110652.ga25...@glandium.org
