[arch-general] A suggestion for the devs regarding rebuilds

[fons at kokkinizita.net]

On Mon, Feb 08, 2010 at 07:36:55PM -0700, Brendan Long wrote:

> On 02/08/2010 06:46 PM, fons at kokkinizita.net wrote:
> >
> >> It just knows that package (which contains application A0 requires
> >> package libfoo (which contains library libfoo.so.1).
> >>     
> > In that case, play it safe and don't remove anything that 
> > any app could depend on. It's better than making a system
> > instantly unusable.
> >   
> If you're going to do that, why use a package manager in the first
> place?

Because even if it does not remove old library versions blindly
it is still immensely useful.

> And really, why use Arch if you don't want updates?

I did never write that I don't want updates.

> Isn't the whole point that you want a system where everything
> is always up to date, even if things might be broken more often ?

No.

> It would be interesting to try to patch yaourt to do what you're wanting
> though. The simplest solution I can think of is some sort of script that
> finds out which files in a package are libraries (probably something
> simple like looking for $pkgname.$pkgver.so, combined with what files
> are different in the new package). When you update a library and a
> package that's held back depends on it:

One very simple solution would be to never delete anything
named /usr/lib/*.so* unless you really have to. That requires
one regexp match. A hack, not perfect but it would help.

Ciao,

-- 
FA

O tu, che porte, correndo si ?
E guerra e morte !