[maemo-developers] Repositories mess: conclusions and actions

From: Ed Bartosh eduard.bartosh at nokia.com
Date: Mon Nov 12 14:40:42 EET 2007
On Mon, 2007-11-12 at 00:03 +0000, ext Graham Cobb wrote:
> On Sunday 11 November 2007 22:32:53 Nick Phillips wrote:
> > On 12/11/2007, at 11:21 AM, Graham Cobb wrote:
> > > I don't think I agree.  I am concerned about what will happen when
> > > V4.1 is
> > > issued.  For Bora I currently build my packages against 3.0 so that
> > > all
> > > releases of Bora can be supported.  I would expect that the same
> > > thing would
> > > happen with Chinook: packages should normally be built against the
> > > oldest
> > > libraries that will work and which do not conflict with the latest
> > > libraries.
> > > Otherwise users may experience unexpected (and partial) upgrades of
> > > base
> > > system components due to installing an application.  Will Nokia
> > > test all
> > > possible combinations of partial OS upgrades when 4.1 comes out?
> > >
> > > This is a complex issue which also requires some further thought
> > > from the
> > > point of view of autobuilder requirements.
> >
> > As I wrote a while ago, I'd recommend people interested in this check
> > out Debian policy (http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/) and
> > Ubuntu's equivalent (not sure where you'd find that), and see how and
> > why Debian and Ubuntu deal with these things. There are differences
> > (e.g. Debian requires a binary on one arch to be uploaded, while
> > Ubuntu allows/prefers autobuilding for all), but there should also be
> > some issues that are pretty firmly resolved one way or the other.
> Checking out major distributions' policies is a good suggestion but this is 
> one particular area where I think Maemo is likely to diverge from Debian.  
> This is because there is a commercial company supporting the OS.
> Let's assume, for a moment, that Nokia introduces a V4.1 that updates both 
> libhildon1 and libhildonfm2 to new versions.  I presume Nokia would test the 
> old versions of the libraries together, and the new versions of the libraries 
> together but would not expend testing effort on testing the new libhildon1 
> with the old libhildonfm2.  And assume that there is actually a bug and the 
> old libhildonfm2 doesn't work correctly with the new libhildon1.
In this case I'd suggest to put both libraries to extras-devel and
tested for upgradeability together with applications. If some issues
will be found bug will be failed and hopefully fixed. Fixed library will
be uploaded to extras-devel and later to extras. Case solved.
I understand that this wouldn't work in 100% cases. But it's better than
force developers to build against old libraries. New libraries usually
bring not only bugs but also useful fixes and it might be that some
applications can't go to extras if they don't use new libraries.

Ed Bartosh <eduard.bartosh at nokia.com>

More information about the maemo-developers mailing list