On Friday 2016-01-22 20:46, SF Markus Elfring wrote:
I suggest you cut the salesbabble, and come up with a *concrete* case where the existing RPM mechanisms are insufficient, instead of making up hypothetical blurry scenarios involving some unspecified packages and interfaces.
How do you think about to make the combination of the properties "application binary interface" and "application programming interface" safer for software libraries like the following?
* libmodman1 / libproxy1 https://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=937157#c5 * yast2-core / libyui6 https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=937665#c2
They both are a duplicate of https://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=903974 where I already bemoaned the lack of symbol versions.
Can specific certification marks help to make the reuse of some software packages a bit safer?
Definitely.
Would you like to improve dependency resolution a bit more?
The dependency *resolution* is fine. The problem is with lazy upstream developers who do not update these "marks" *at all* when they made a change. They must do one of the following: - change the SONAME (the mark changes from "libmodman.so.1" -> "libmodman.so.2") - add symbol versions (the mark changes from "libmodman.so.1(V_1)" to "libmodman.so.1(V_2)")
* Difficulties with activation of another current Nvidia graphic driver https://forums.opensuse.org/showthread.php/512847-Difficulties-with-activati...
TL;DR. The ".run" installer from nvidia is a homebrew solution and tramples on files managed by RPM - which subsequently get replaced by RPM at some point again. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org