Re: Fun with python-apt

2003-08-25 Thread Samuel Bronson
Anthony DeRobertis wrote: > In a perfect world, somehow the correct gcc would be used (to make > sure C++ ABI problems don't happen). Not sure if we can have that > perfect world or not; see below. In a perfect world, the ABI wouldn't need to change ;-)

Re: Fun with python-apt

2003-06-15 Thread Anthony DeRobertis
On Sunday, Jun 15, 2003, at 15:50 US/Eastern, Matt Zimmerman wrote: Er, no. Those binaries would work perfectly fine if you had built apt with the same C++ ABI. But I can't specify in a build-dependency "oh, and your apt must be built with the same C++ ABI". I _certainly_ can't do so retroa

Re: Fun with python-apt

2003-06-15 Thread Anthony DeRobertis
On Saturday, Jun 14, 2003, at 19:17 US/Eastern, Matt Zimmerman wrote: This was before woody released, before there was any kind of C++ ABI transition plan, before there was even a g++-3.2 in the archive. Surely you aren't suggesting that last year's build-dependencies should have anticipated

Re: Fun with python-apt

2003-06-15 Thread Matt Zimmerman
On Sun, Jun 15, 2003 at 03:23:37PM -0400, Anthony DeRobertis wrote: > In a perfect world, somehow the correct gcc would be used (to make sure > C++ ABI problems don't happen). Not sure if we can have that perfect world > or not; see below. No, we can't. Not today, and definitely not a year ago.

Re: Fun with python-apt

2003-06-15 Thread Anthony DeRobertis
On Saturday, Jun 14, 2003, at 18:45 US/Eastern, Matt Zimmerman wrote: My two questions were: 1) Why did dpkg-buildpackage wind up compiling with the wrong compiler? Isn't there a C++ transition plan that should prevent that. python-apt will, by default, use the de

Re: Fun with python-apt

2003-06-14 Thread Matt Zimmerman
On Sun, Jun 15, 2003 at 01:05:37AM +0200, Bernd Eckenfels wrote: > On Sat, Jun 14, 2003 at 06:45:21PM -0400, Matt Zimmerman wrote: > > According to 2.4.2, the package should build correctly. It did. > > However, it didn't run because you had an incompatible version of apt > > installed. The depe

Re: Fun with python-apt

2003-06-14 Thread Bernd Eckenfels
On Sat, Jun 14, 2003 at 06:45:21PM -0400, Matt Zimmerman wrote: > According to 2.4.2, the package should build correctly. It did. However, > it didn't run because you had an incompatible version of apt installed. The > dependency system does not have a facility to handle this situation. Well, o

Re: Fun with python-apt

2003-06-14 Thread Matt Zimmerman
On Sat, Jun 14, 2003 at 05:46:51PM -0400, Anthony DeRobertis wrote: > On Saturday, Jun 14, 2003, at 01:40 US/Eastern, Matt Zimmerman wrote: > > > >If you had wanted to find out the answer before sending this to > >debian-devel, you would not have had to look very far. > >bugs.debian.org/python-apt

Re: Fun with python-apt

2003-06-14 Thread Bernd Eckenfels
On Sat, Jun 14, 2003 at 05:46:51PM -0400, Anthony DeRobertis wrote: > My two questions were: > 1) Why did dpkg-buildpackage wind up compiling with the wrong > compiler? Isn't there a C++ transition plan that should > prevent that. I think it using the most current one, whic

Re: Fun with python-apt

2003-06-14 Thread Anthony DeRobertis
On Saturday, Jun 14, 2003, at 01:40 US/Eastern, Matt Zimmerman wrote: If you had wanted to find out the answer before sending this to debian-devel, you would not have had to look very far. bugs.debian.org/python-apt has the answer three times over. http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?

Re: Fun with python-apt

2003-06-14 Thread Matt Zimmerman
On Sat, Jun 14, 2003 at 12:28:30PM +0200, Bastian Kleineidam wrote: > On Sat, Jun 14, 2003 at 01:40:12AM -0400, Matt Zimmerman wrote: > > If you had wanted to find out the answer before sending this to > > debian-devel, you would not have had to look very far. > > bugs.debian.org/python-apt has th

Re: Fun with python-apt

2003-06-14 Thread Bastian Kleineidam
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi, On Sat, Jun 14, 2003 at 01:40:12AM -0400, Matt Zimmerman wrote: > On Sat, Jun 14, 2003 at 01:11:56AM -0400, Anthony DeRobertis wrote: > > > I've managed to get python-apt (and thus apt-listchanges) working again > > on my testing system. What a P

Re: Fun with python-apt

2003-06-14 Thread Matt Zimmerman
On Sat, Jun 14, 2003 at 01:11:56AM -0400, Anthony DeRobertis wrote: > I've managed to get python-apt (and thus apt-listchanges) working again > on my testing system. What a PITA... > > Anyway, I first just tried to recompile python-apt-0.5.4.3. Compile went > fine, but the first attempt to execu

Fun with python-apt

2003-06-14 Thread Anthony DeRobertis
I've managed to get python-apt (and thus apt-listchanges) working again on my testing system. What a PITA... Anyway, I first just tried to recompile python-apt-0.5.4.3. Compile went fine, but the first attempt to execute apt-listchanges failed with a dynamic linking error. C++ API change. First,