Brian May writes: > >>>>> "Ian" == Ian Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Ian> However, with the current arrangement I can't do that. > Ian> Whenever I want to upgrade a binary package I have to update > Ian> the libraries that it depends on to at least as recent a > Ian> version. But, because the runtime libraries and development > Ian> libraries must be in version lockstep, this means I have to > Ian> upgrade the development package too. Then, due to further > Ian> dependencies, I usually find I have to upgrade my entire > Ian> development environment, and often including the C and C++ > Ian> compilers and a whole slew of unrelated tools, to the version > Ian> from unstable. > > I am confused, maybe somebody can help clarify. > > For example, if I look at libreadline2, libreadlineg2 and libreadline4 > can all be installed at the same time. Isn't it then simply a matter > of selecting the development package that corresponds with the > required version? Not infrequently, this is something that happens within a major version - a quick look at current packages suggest that particular versions are quite often necessary. > Of course, this won't help if a new and incompatable version of a > library has the same major version, (eg glibc 2.1 vs glibc 2.0), and > hence cannot be installed at the same time, but perhaps these could be > treated as special cases where the symlink *is* replaced by the actual > file, especially for older versions of the library? eg you could[1]
Clearly there is a case for leaving it up to the maintainers' discretion, but of course with the caveat that if people have problems such as those that Ian describes, then a bug will have to be submitted - making all libraries provide the file seems a simpler solution to me. Matthew -- "At least you know where you are with Microsoft." "True. I just wish I'd brought a paddle." http://www.debian.org
