On Mon, Jan 24, 2005 at 05:54:20PM -0500, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
On Mon, 24 Jan 2005 23:40:43 +0100, Axel Thimm
<Axel.Thimm(a)atrpms.net> wrote:
> Not sure how this fits in here. These are valid points you make, but
> they are valid for both the current and a soname-in-the-rpmname scheme
> :)
keeping the package the same name... regardless of the soname means
on distro upgrade
the old version gets removed. This works to expire an older library
package but breaks externally build apps that need the old library.
You want to keep those things from breaking and I want to expired libs
off the system. I would prefer to use the sonames in the packages as
sparingly as possible.. to minimize the amount of deprecated libraries
on system...until there is a solution to the larger question of how
expiring of a package is suppose to work.
Already posted in different siblings of this thread and implemented at
ATrpms. Auto-expiring packages that should be disposed of if there is
no dependency on them should simply provide a fake dependency to hook
a garbage collector to.
The concept is solid, proven on various distros and even within the
Red Hat world at ATrpms.
--
Axel.Thimm at
ATrpms.net