Specifying Dependencies in Packages

RobK · 2005-12-07 14:24:44

I read the wiki on ABS.

The example given only lists as dependencies the packages such as qt and xorg.

Can you soecify a version?. e.g. Can you specify the dependency as xorg>6.8.1?

Rob

rose · 2005-12-07 14:32:45

No. If you need this, go Debian/Ubuntu.

Snowman · 2005-12-07 14:48:23

RobK wrote:

I read the wiki on ABS.
The example given only lists as dependencies the packages such as qt and xorg.
Can you soecify a version?. e.g. Can you specify the dependency as xorg>6.8.1?
Rob

Yes, you can. Usually, it is not necessary to do so unless the apps needs a specific version of the dependency to work.

man makepkg wrote:

depends (array)
An array of packages that this package depends on
to build and run. Packages in this list should be
surrounded with single quotes and contain at least
the package name.They can also include a version
requirement of the form name<>version, where <> is
one of these three comparisons: >= (greater than
equal to), <= (less than or equal to), or = (equal
to).

xerverius · 2005-12-07 16:14:05

rose wrote:

No. If you need this, go Debian/Ubuntu.

Maybe you should go to Debian/Ubuntu... If you don't even know how the
Arch packages work

BobK wrote:

Can you soecify a version?. e.g. Can you specify the dependency as xorg>6.8.1?

You can find a sample here, to make it a bit more clear: Cairo

phrakture · 2005-12-07 16:51:12

For the most part, version specific depends should be ignored. Arch does not provide multiple versions of packages, and as such, a ">=" requirement should always be satisfied, as you cannot install previous versions.

RobK · 2005-12-07 22:27:49

Hmm.. I do think that specifying the version numbers is needed in some circumstances. For example, there may be problems with those users that use the latest stable Released version and only upgrade a couple of packages from Current (that may need newer dependencies)

And there may be some packages that only work with older dependencies not the newer ones.

Rob

phrakture · 2005-12-07 23:45:53

RobK wrote:

For example, there may be problems with those users that use the latest stable Released version and only upgrade a couple of packages from Current (that may need newer dependencies)

That should not be happening. In Arch, upgrading is binary - you either upgrade or you don't. As I said, old versions of packages are not supported. If you selectively upgrade one package, but not other related packages, and it breaks, someone will tell you "upgrade". Simple as that.

RobK wrote:

And there may be some packages that only work with older dependencies not the newer ones.

This case happens on occasion, but because arch does not supply previous versions of something, extra packages are made. For instance, the AUR has a "pysqlite-legacy" package, which is something like pysqlite 1.0.6. The reason it is there is because the developer of supybot uses that version, and does not want to upgrade. This was developed at the time when pysqlite 2.0 was already out. Because Arch does not supply older versions, there is no way to "downgrade" to 1.0.6 just for this app - so a seperate package is made.

It's not really a big deal.

RobK · 2005-12-08 14:23:34

That is good news. There are some programs that I would like to get running that use old libs like the free version of Corel WordPerfect for Linux. (I need WP for work and somtimes OpenOffice won't open the docs).

I am looking forward to getting Arch to work the way I want. I am a frustrated Slackware user who wants more tansparency in how the binary packages are created. (I also like LFS but it is more work to keep that going).

It looks like arch may be the disto I am looking for.

Rob

dtw · 2005-12-08 15:07:09

Flexibility is Arch's middle name - there are some many scripts created by users to improve on the basics it's hard to keep track. I mean, look at the number of pacman frontends!

rose · 2005-12-08 16:13:37

xerverius wrote:

rose wrote:
No. If you need this, go Debian/Ubuntu.
Maybe you should go to Debian/Ubuntu... If you don't even know how the
Arch packages work

Sorry, I didn't know. I remember Arch didn't have version dependencies when I last used it.

I don't have to go Debian/Ubuntu, because I'm a happy FreeDOS user

Arch Linux

#1 2005-12-07 14:24:44

Specifying Dependencies in Packages

#2 2005-12-07 14:32:45

Re: Specifying Dependencies in Packages

#3 2005-12-07 14:48:23

Re: Specifying Dependencies in Packages

#4 2005-12-07 16:14:05

Re: Specifying Dependencies in Packages

#5 2005-12-07 16:51:12

Re: Specifying Dependencies in Packages

#6 2005-12-07 22:27:49

Re: Specifying Dependencies in Packages

#7 2005-12-07 23:45:53

Re: Specifying Dependencies in Packages

#8 2005-12-08 14:23:34

Re: Specifying Dependencies in Packages

#9 2005-12-08 15:07:09

Re: Specifying Dependencies in Packages

#10 2005-12-08 16:13:37

Re: Specifying Dependencies in Packages

Board footer