On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 12:05 PM David Cantrell <dcantrell(a)redhat.com> 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!