On Tue, 2005-04-05 at 04:53 -0400, Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-04-05 at 04:27 -0400, seth vidal wrote:
> > > No, it was deliberate. It's there for the purpose of allowing the
> > > package to be built for versions of python other than the primary one,
> > > e.g., python-2.4 under FC3. It most likely won't get much use, but who's
> > > to say a similar problem won't show up in the future?
> >
> > So wait a sec - you included it so people could build the package for a
> > version of python that's newer/older than the installed one?
> >
> > I think that seems a bit over engineered considering the prominence of
> > python on the system.
>
> You aren't wrong, but who's to say that it's a bad thing? I mean, other
> than it exposing a minor flaw in mach. Which I am working on, btw.
Well, you are encouraging people to put themselves into a situation
where they've got two ABI-incompatible packages with the same NVREA, and
different deps.
That's a very bad thing; if you're in the scenario where you've got
multiple packages, indistinguishable by NVREA, it means you *can't* do
server-side dependency resolution.
So it screws remote management software completely.
--
Peter
