MESSAGE
| DATE | 2017-11-22 |
| FROM | Ruben Safir
|
| SUBJECT | Re: [Hangout - NYLXS] Fwd: Re: [artix-general] icu - run both
|
On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 01:43:09PM -0500, Ruben Safir wrote:
>
>
>
> Chris Cromer
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 12:52 PM, Ruben Safir wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 12:23:21AM -0300, Chris Cromer wrote:
> >> I admit that ICU getting pushed too soon was a problem. But the problem was
> >> not because of a broken package. All those other packages needed to be
> >> recompiled against the new libs since the ABI is incompatible in the new
> >> lib. An unfortunate situation yes, but sometimes these things happen on a
> >> rolling release distro.
> >>
> >
> >
> > That is incorrect. I was talking to Rick Moen about this last night and
> > the packages are broken and were always broken and will continue to be
> > broken. ICU is not a declared dependency in the packages although they
> > are in the source files.
>
> Packages don't have to have "depends" declcared for every single
> possible thing in the packages to link against them, it is enough that
> they are installed by a dependency of a dependency. So if package C
> depends on package B and package A, and package B depends on package
> A, it is enough to make package C only depend on package B which forms
> a chain of dependencies.
BTW - yeah what you describe here seems to have failed. There should
be a cascade of dependencies and they were broken.
A is udate that should have caused B to be update which should have
triggered C to be in conflict.
or A is updated and then B and C needs to be updated which should have
caused a conflict with E and F through B and G and H through C.
If it fails in autoconf it should fail in the binary package.
_______________________________________________
Hangout mailing list
Hangout-at-nylxs.com
http://lists.mrbrklyn.com/mailman/listinfo/hangout
|
|
