On Sat, 3 Jan 2009 22:12:51 -0800, Conrad wrote: > On Saturday 03 January 2009 10:05:55 pm Basil Mohamed Gohar wrote: > > > > For future reference, would it be better (this is my ignorance asking) > > for a dependency to be on a library (x.so.n) or on a package > > name/version combination (x.version)? > > Library dependencies are generated automatically so it is considered poor > style to Require: the package explicitly. "Poor style" is not the reason, however. Package name dependencies are weak. Much weaker than the automatic dependencies on a specific library SONAME -- in particular everytime the library SONAME is changed. Dependencies on minimum package version ranges are weak, too. Less weak, but often they get out-of-date. Strict dependencies on specific package versions are fragile. All of them make it harder to rename a package or move the library elsewhere. And a superfluous explicit dependency on a package name adds confusion. It suggests that package "foo" is sufficient, but the depsolver fails to resolve the stricter, automatically added library dependency nevertheless. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
