[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       debian-devel
Subject:    Re: Another take on package relationship substvars
From:       Niels Thykier <niels () thykier ! net>
Date:       2024-02-23 7:19:09
Message-ID: f51a12d3-a7c7-4a78-92fb-e9b0a67ab1cf () thykier ! net
[Download RAW message or body]

Simon McVittie:
> On Thu, 22 Feb 2024 at 20:43:21 +0100, Niels Thykier wrote:
>> Simon McVittie:
>>> On Thu, 22 Feb 2024 at 19:32:21 +0100, Niels Thykier wrote:
>>>> We could also make unused substvars a hard failure (FTBFS).
>>>
>>> I'd prefer not this
>>
>> Reminder: My proposal only covers ${foo:Depends} and similar substvars. The
>> first example you present uses substvars that do not match that pattern.
> 
> Sorry, did you mean that your alternate proposal is: we could make unused
> substvars **that match *:Depends** (and the other related patterns) a hard
> failure, without affecting substvars not matching that pattern? If so,
> that wasn't obvious to me!
> 

Indeed, that is what I meant. I see that others had the same confusion, 
which could probably avoided if I had said "relationship substvars" 
instead. Sorry for the confusion.

> If the scope of "unused substvars => hard failure" is limited to
> foo:Depends and so on, then yes, I agree that the concern I described
> doesn't apply.
> 

Thanks for confirming.

> Another reason to be cautious about making missing foo:Depends a hard
> failure is that it would mean tools usually can't add new :Depends without
> either gating it behind a debhelper compat level bump (or equivalent),
> or making potentially large numbers of dependent packages regress
> (usually discouraged). So I still prefer your initial proposal.
> 
>      smcv
> 

Thank you. I agree with this counter argument. That seems like a very 
annoying problem to deal with that will likely cause a lot of extra 
"infrastructure" that I think nobody wants.

Thanks for the feedback. It was very useful :)

Best regards,
Niels


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]