FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.

» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Debian > Debian Development

LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 11-23-2007, 10:31 AM
Raphael Hertzog
Default About dpkg-shlibdeps checks

On Fri, 23 Nov 2007, Sune Vuorela wrote:
> On 2007-11-23, Raphael Hertzog <hertzog@debian.org> wrote:
> > Well, the d-d-a mail included a list of affected packages. So we had a
> > clue on how many packages are affected. The list has probably evolved
> > since september but not by much.
> Except covering kde now. KDE didn't change that much since september.

Apparently not any more with the dpkg-shlibdeps that implements the exceptions
that I listed in my first mail... (you know it since you tested it for me)

I'm willing to take some blame, mind you. But I'm just not willing to
fully revert a decision because some grumpy maintainers are not happy that
they have some fixing to do (in particular when it looks like they don't
really understand the issues at hand).

Raphaël Hertzog

Premier livre français sur Debian GNU/Linux :

To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Old 11-23-2007, 10:41 AM
Pierre Habouzit
Default About dpkg-shlibdeps checks

On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 11:15:46AM +0000, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
> Pierre Habouzit wrote:
> > But forcing every maintainer that probably had an agenda for their
> > package already, to comply to yours without even knowing what's coming
> > is at the very least tactless and disruptive.
> the new dpkg was in experimental for a long enough time, and this was
> announced often enough. If packages run into trouble with it now, it's
> imho not the problem of the dpkg maintainer (except there're bugs in
> dpkg, of course).

I disagree. We have (Raphael among the "we") little clues right now on
how well the new implementation will work on a large scale. We already
see a lot of nasty failures happen that aren't expected, because the
maintainers that will likely suffer from those the most, are the one
that already had the less time to test it.

"announcing" a new feature and giving a time-frame for people to
conform and then shoot them, is not really what I call management.
Proper management includes a staging period between the absence of the
failure, and the full pedantic activation of it.

There is a huge difference between a dpkg in experimental that many a
couple of people tried, and being forced to suffer its disruption during
a transition or a long planned upload. So I urge Raphael to keep the
"errors" warnings for a month so that people can get used to it, and
take proper measures.

The disruption it caused to the KDE guys (and I fear for OOo or
moizilla) isn't _that_ surprising to me, and it's completely unfair to
prevent them from doing anything. Because that's what dpkg-shlibdeps
does: the KDE team think it's a 3days effort to support the new
dpkg-shlibdeps. They had plans, it gets all destroyed because there
wasn't an incremental introduction of the feature.

What I've learned, and I believed that Debian should know since: in
computing (and I believe in many other areas) *NOTHING* works according
to the plan. So you'd better have a progressive plan to keep the issues
manageable. The "Off->On" switch button is the worst one can do in that

I absolutely don't understand what Raphael has to gain by forcing
everyone to fix their package *RIGHT NOW OR YOU DIE HAHAHAHA*, except
raising the frustration levels wrt a migration that I believe goes in
the good direction. It's not because it's a good thing that it should be
aggressively forced and imposed to the face of the world.

·O· Pierre Habouzit
··O madcoder@debian.org
OOO http://www.madism.org
Old 11-23-2007, 10:43 AM
Pierre Habouzit
Default About dpkg-shlibdeps checks

On ven, nov 23, 2007 at 11:31:57 +0000, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> (in particular when it looks like they don't really understand the
> issues at hand).

Please, this ad hominem isn't deserved, because the KDE team could
exactly answer the same to you. Mind you, but the huge workload you just
inflicted to them shows that you maybe underestimate "slightly" what
their work is.

·O· Pierre Habouzit
··O madcoder@debian.org
OOO http://www.madism.org

Thread Tools

All times are GMT. The time now is 08:49 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright ©2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org