guile-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Any opposition to changing share/guile/X.Y.Z to share/guile/X.Y?


From: tomas
Subject: Re: Any opposition to changing share/guile/X.Y.Z to share/guile/X.Y?
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2002 18:14:46 +0100
User-agent: Mutt/1.3.28i

On Wed, Nov 13, 2002 at 02:33:05PM -0500, Mikael Djurfeldt wrote:
> Rob Browning <address@hidden> writes:
> 

[...]

> But if you ask my current uninformed opinion, and given the current
> poor status of UNIX tool for handling this kind of dependencies, I'd
> say I prefer separating micro versions and recompiling things between
> micro version releases. :)

...which of course kills the idea of a binary distribution, in practical
terms. You can't install package X without upgrading library Y by two
micro steps -- otoh the vital package Z depends too strongly on micro
(probably it's not serious, but do you know?) version. You see things of
this kind in Debian. OTOH distros are becoming so huge that it's more
and more of a pain to create frozen self-consistent `versions'.

What to do?

(I think Rob's fight to ``hide'' micro version as much as possible
is a laudable step in this direction).

Regards

-- tomas




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]