Re: Providing a stub to avoid problem packaging?

2002-09-10 Thread Robert Bihlmeyer
Stephen Peters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > One workaround I can think of for this case is to provide a pair of > stub classes that would merely implement the interface that the > package needs to compile, and add a note to the README.Debian stating > that the user will have to download their own

Re: binutils-dev dependency problem...

2002-09-10 Thread Ian Zimmerman
Adam> Moreover, binutils-dev description says: Adam> "Note that building Debian packages which depend on the shared Adam> libbfd is Not Allowed." Adam> So what should I do to fix the problems? Link whole package Adam> staticaly?? Thanks in advance for your help... This is actually quite intere

Re: Providing a stub to avoid problem packaging?

2002-09-10 Thread Robert Bihlmeyer
Stephen Peters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > One workaround I can think of for this case is to provide a pair of > stub classes that would merely implement the interface that the > package needs to compile, and add a note to the README.Debian stating > that the user will have to download their ow

Re: binutils-dev dependency problem...

2002-09-10 Thread Ian Zimmerman
Adam> Moreover, binutils-dev description says: Adam> "Note that building Debian packages which depend on the shared Adam> libbfd is Not Allowed." Adam> So what should I do to fix the problems? Link whole package Adam> staticaly?? Thanks in advance for your help... This is actually quite inter

dpkg's treatment of symlinks

2002-09-10 Thread Marco Kuhlmann
Dear mentors, I found out a little more about my current troubles with the new versions of my packages mozart, mozart-contrib, and mozart-doc-html. The phenomenon is this: Where the old version of mozart contains a _directory_ /usr/lib/mozart/include and a _symlink_ to it from /usr/include/m

binutils-dev dependency problem...

2002-09-10 Thread Adam Byrtek
Hi, I have a package 'fenris', which depends on libbfd. The problem is it depends on the EXACT version of the library: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ ldd which fenris libbfd-2.12.90.0.1.so => /usr/lib/libbfd-2.12.90.0.1.so (0x40049000) ... and my package has to depend on exactly the same version of

dpkg's treatment of symlinks

2002-09-10 Thread Marco Kuhlmann
Dear mentors, I found out a little more about my current troubles with the new versions of my packages mozart, mozart-contrib, and mozart-doc-html. The phenomenon is this: Where the old version of mozart contains a _directory_ /usr/lib/mozart/include and a _symlink_ to it from /usr/include/

binutils-dev dependency problem...

2002-09-10 Thread Adam Byrtek
Hi, I have a package 'fenris', which depends on libbfd. The problem is it depends on the EXACT version of the library: alpha@mentat:~$ ldd which fenris libbfd-2.12.90.0.1.so => /usr/lib/libbfd-2.12.90.0.1.so (0x40049000) ... and my package has to depend on exactly the same version of bin

Re: substvar in Arch:

2002-09-10 Thread Stefano Zacchiroli
On Tue, Sep 10, 2002 at 04:42:48AM +0200, Goswin Brederlow wrote: > on all archs having the compiler and fail on others. This should not > prevent the package from going into testing or stable as long as no > previous package exists for one of the failing archs. Ok, but is this a supposed "clean"

Re: substvar in Arch:

2002-09-10 Thread Sven LUTHER
On Tue, Sep 10, 2002 at 04:42:48AM +0200, Goswin Brederlow wrote: > Stefano Zacchiroli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Hi mentors, > > is possible to have an Arch: field defined by a substvar? > > > > Our problem (with our = debian ocaml maintainers) is that ocaml native > > code compiler isn

Re: problem replacing package

2002-09-10 Thread Sven LUTHER
On Mon, Sep 09, 2002 at 08:06:58PM +0200, Matus fantomas Uhlar wrote: > -> > -> That would require versioned dependencies on virtual packages > (versioned > -> > -> Provides:) to work, but they don't. You'll probably have to use > -> > -> something like a high epoch instead. > -> > > -> > Pardon?

Re: Multiple Binary and man pages

2002-09-10 Thread Sven LUTHER
On Mon, Sep 09, 2002 at 07:42:15PM +0100, Roger Leigh wrote: > Sven LUTHER <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > On Sun, Sep 08, 2002 at 08:21:09PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote: > > > > > > Provided your packages conflict, you can make two files, > > > debian/server.conf.5 and debian/server-enhanced.conf.5

Re: substvar in Arch:

2002-09-10 Thread Stefano Zacchiroli
On Tue, Sep 10, 2002 at 04:42:48AM +0200, Goswin Brederlow wrote: > on all archs having the compiler and fail on others. This should not > prevent the package from going into testing or stable as long as no > previous package exists for one of the failing archs. Ok, but is this a supposed "clean"

Re: substvar in Arch:

2002-09-10 Thread Sven LUTHER
On Tue, Sep 10, 2002 at 04:42:48AM +0200, Goswin Brederlow wrote: > Stefano Zacchiroli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Hi mentors, > > is possible to have an Arch: field defined by a substvar? > > > > Our problem (with our = debian ocaml maintainers) is that ocaml native > > code compiler is

Re: problem replacing package

2002-09-10 Thread Sven LUTHER
On Mon, Sep 09, 2002 at 08:06:58PM +0200, Matus fantomas Uhlar wrote: > -> > -> That would require versioned dependencies on virtual packages (versioned > -> > -> Provides:) to work, but they don't. You'll probably have to use > -> > -> something like a high epoch instead. > -> > > -> > Pardon? D

Re: Multiple Binary and man pages

2002-09-10 Thread Sven LUTHER
On Mon, Sep 09, 2002 at 07:42:15PM +0100, Roger Leigh wrote: > Sven LUTHER <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > On Sun, Sep 08, 2002 at 08:21:09PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote: > > > > > > Provided your packages conflict, you can make two files, > > > debian/server.conf.5 and debian/server-enhanced.conf.