On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 12:05 PM David Cantrell <dcantrell@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 6/14/19 2:52 AM, Remi Collet wrote: > > Le 13/06/2019 à 20:31, Adam Samalik a écrit : > >> So, I'd like to discuss the libgit issue [1] [2] we're experiencing. With a > >> help of a few people, I've put together this post to get us on common > >> ground: https://communityblog.fedoraproject.org/modularity-vs-libgit/ > >> > >> There are few ideas about solving the issue right now. But we might be able > >> to think about better ways to deal with similar issues long-term. Let's do > >> this! > > > > IMHO, having library in modules is an error, this can only raise issues > > > > Perhaps debian was right, and we should use a naming schema matching the > > library ABI, so including the soname > > > > libgit26-0.26.8 > > libgit27-0.27.8 > > libgit28-0.28.1 > > etc > > > > Thanks to soname, library are perfect use case for parallel installation > > of multiple versions. > > +1 > > We could go a step further and extend rpm and dnf to support multiple > versions of same named packages for installation. This is doable but > not necessarily trivial. Upgrades would need a way to specify what > package NVR they are upgrading (doable) and dependencies, requires, and > obsoletes would need to be reviewed to ensure you don't wipe out a > version you want installed. Plus more. Solvable and the same end > result for users, just a different approach. > I would actually really like to see rpm's multiversioning capabilities extended to support this. -- 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth! _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
