Merge lp://staging/~sil2100/ubuntu-seeds/ubuntu-touch-remove-boost-hard-version-dep into lp://staging/~ubuntu-core-dev/ubuntu-seeds/ubuntu-touch.wily

Proposed by Łukasz Zemczak
Status: Merged
Merged at revision: 309
Proposed branch: lp://staging/~sil2100/ubuntu-seeds/ubuntu-touch-remove-boost-hard-version-dep
Merge into: lp://staging/~ubuntu-core-dev/ubuntu-seeds/ubuntu-touch.wily
Diff against target: 11 lines (+0/-1)
1 file modified
sdk-libs-dev (+0/-1)
To merge this branch: bzr merge lp://staging/~sil2100/ubuntu-seeds/ubuntu-touch-remove-boost-hard-version-dep
Reviewer Review Type Date Requested Status
Steve Langasek Needs Information
Review via email: mp+267177@code.staging.launchpad.net

Commit message

Try not to depend on an explicit boost version in sdk-libs-dev as there are no reasons to do so. This will unblock a few packages and make main boost transitions a bit less painful (seeds won't require bumping with each release).

Description of the change

Try not to depend on an explicit boost version in sdk-libs-dev as there are no reasons to do so. This will unblock a few packages and make main boost transitions a bit less painful (seeds won't require bumping with each release).

Currently this blocks many packages from migrating to the release pocket. The issue is that currently sdk-libs-dev deps on libboost1.55-dev. The main seed branch had this dep bumped to libboost1.58-dev but this is still in -proposed (and the transition will take a long time to finish). There's no real reason to depend on a specific version here, so we can simply use the dependency package instead. There should be no consequences of this change (besides the positive ones)

To post a comment you must log in.
Revision history for this message
Steve Langasek (vorlon) wrote :

If there's no reason to depend on a specific version of boost, why do we depend on it at all? I understand the argument for why we shouldn't be depending on a specific boost version is that the boost interfaces should not be directly exposed as part of our SDK. "Not exposed" == "not depended upon".

review: Needs Information
Revision history for this message
Łukasz Zemczak (sil2100) wrote :

That is a valid point. Checking the dependencies, boost should be pulled in by libunity-scopes-dev in sdk-libs-dev. This pulls in libunity-api-dev which depends on libboost-dev. I see no other point on depending on it here. If that's fine, I'll remove this dependency at all as you proposed.

310. By Łukasz Zemczak

As per Steve's proposition, we can simply remove the libboost dep altogether as it's being pulled in by scopes deps.

Preview Diff

[H/L] Next/Prev Comment, [J/K] Next/Prev File, [N/P] Next/Prev Hunk
The diff is not available at this time. You can reload the page or download it.

Subscribers

People subscribed via source and target branches