Re: Markus Wanner 2017-06-16 <eb34b0f5-1b73-e8c4-dbac-ef29c8e0c24c@bluegap.ch>
> On 06/16/2017 10:31 AM, Christoph Berg wrote:
> > It doesn't say that it is needed for the initial installation as well.
>
> Correct, that should be included in the (long) description.
I just pushed some fixes that should clarify the roles of
postgresql-9.6-postgis-2.4 and postgresql-9.6-postgis-2.4-scripts.
> > From UX viewpoint, it would be nice if "apt-get install
> > postgresql-9.6-postgis-2.3" just worked.
>
> It does. At least as long as you don't disable installation of
> recommended packages *and* don't another version of the scripts
> installed, already.
>
> Actually, even just installing `postgis` does the trick, then.
Right, except everyone I know disables installation of recommends...
> > My idea would be:
> >
> > Package: postgresql-9.6-postgis-2.3
> > Depends: postgresql-9.6-postgis-scripts
>
> IIRC that's what we had before, but reverted forth and back to versioned
> scripts packages...
I wrapped my brain for some time about that, and came to the
conclusion that Depends: doesn't really work, short of introducing
other ugly hacks. The package description now clearly mentions that
the -scripts package is needed, so we should be good now.
> > ... users could even install older postgis extensions by using
> > the correct CREATE EXTENSION ... VERSION command.
>
> Does that work for older versions when postgis.control is from the most
> current one? IIRC that's the only file that really requires the -scripts
> packages to conflict.
The control files should be the same, except for one line that has the
default version to create, which isn't used if an explicit version is
given.
Christoph
--
Sent via pgsql-pkg-debian mailing list (pgsql-pkg-debian@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-pkg-debian
