| 1 |
On 29 September 2010 15:33, Fabian Groffen <grobian@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> On 29-09-2010 15:27:36 +0200, Peter Waller wrote: |
| 4 |
> > It seems dangerous to expect people using prefix to see this email? Can't |
| 5 |
> > you do this in a way that people installing the package notice? |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> not really, since it's a general preserved-libs problem, openssl is just |
| 8 |
> a bad package to break. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
This seems like bad practice not to have a way to do this. I don't think you |
| 12 |
can reasonably expect everyone updating their prefix installation to see |
| 13 |
posts on this mailing list. You're talking about causing people considerable |
| 14 |
pain, possibly effectively irreversible - at least to less experienced |
| 15 |
users - unless you publish the details of your hacks required to fix it |
| 16 |
after it is broken. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
I don't see why such breakage should be necessary in the circumstance that |
| 19 |
someone innocently wants to update some packages. Isn't Jeremy's solution |
| 20 |
possible, for instance? |
Archives