[Mageia-dev] Backports Summary

Wed Jun 27 16:36:53 CEST 2012

nicolas vigier a écrit :
+> On Wed, 27 Jun 2012, andre999 wrote:
+>
+>    
+>> Thomas Backlund a écrit :
+>>      
+>>> andre999 skrev 27.6.2012 14:40:
+>>>        
+>>>> Thomas Backlund a écrit :
+>>>>          
+>>>>> andre999 skrev 27.6.2012 10:47:
+>>>>>            
+>>>        
+>>>>>> I would favour adding the requirement that the dependancies of the
+>>>>>> backport must be available in the next release.  So that we would
+>>>>>> expect
+>>>>>>              
+>>>>>
+>>>>> This is esentially stating that we cant backport any bigger version to
+>>>>> mga2 /backports than mga3 will havein /release wich means when we hit
+>>>>> version freeze for mga3, it also freezes mga2 /backports...
+>>>>>            
+>>>> I'm not following this point.
+>>>> What I mean is that if backport xx for mga1 requires yy version 12 in
+>>>> mga1, but yy is version 13 in mga2, we would define the requires for yy
+>>>> to accept versions 12 to 13 (or maybe wider).
+>>>>          
+>>> Point is what if you backport version 14 to mga1, and mga2 has version 13,
+>>> then upgrade path breaks.
+>>>        
+>> No problem.  If the requirements of version 14 are present in mga2, then
+>> the backport will (very likely) continue to work normally.  If the versions
+>> of the required packages change, they will be updated with the upgrade.
+>> Since version 13 of mga2 is less than the version 14 of the backport, it
+>> won't be installed.
+>>      
+> There is no guaranty that requirements of version 14 mga1 backports are
+> all available in mageia 2. If it is linked with libsomething.so.1, but
+> mageia 2 only has libsomething.so.2, then there is a problem.
+>
+>    
+That was my point.
+I was suggesting that it be required that backport requires be 
+compatible with newer releases.
+In your example, cauldron would probably require the libsomething.so.2, 
+so if the backport requires could be adjusted to work with 
+libsomething.so.1, we would keep the requires compatible with 
+libsomething.so.2.  If that isn't possible, then it wouldn't be accepted.
+I'm no expert of course, but it seems to me that it would be generally 
+possible as long as there weren't important code changes made to make 
+the backport work.
+So it would largely be a question of appropriately adjusting the 
+specified requires.
+
+-- 
+André
+
+