libgd-dev vs. libgd1g-dev?
The woody branch build-depends on libgd1g-dev. This is potato's
1.7.3-0.1, whereas libgd-dev is woody's 1.8.4-2. Should the
build-depends be changed, or is there a specific reason to stick with
the potato version? diffs follow.
_Mark_ <eichin@thok.org>
The Herd of Kittens
Debian Package Maintainer
--
RCS file: /cvs/debian-boot/boot-floppies/debian/control,v
retrieving revision 1.50.2.6
diff -u -r1.50.2.6 control
--- debian/control 2001/02/13 06:10:11 1.50.2.6
+++ debian/control 2001/03/05 23:47:04
@@ -4,11 +4,11 @@
Maintainer: Debian Install System Team <debian-boot@lists.debian.org>
Standards-Version: 3.1.1
Build-Depends-Indep: debhelper
-Build-Depends: glibc-pic, slang1-pic, libnewt-dev, libpopt-dev, zlib1g-dev, recode, gettext, m4, debiandoc-sgml, libi18n-langtags-perl, man-db, libpaperg, tetex-bin, tetex-extra, perl5, libwww-perl, pointerize, libgd1g-dev, bison, ash, dpkg-awk, flex, file, debhelper, gawk, console-data
+Build-Depends: glibc-pic, slang1-pic, libnewt-dev, libpopt-dev, zlib1g-dev, recode, gettext, m4, debiandoc-sgml, libi18n-langtags-perl, man-db, libpaperg, tetex-bin, tetex-extra, perl5, libwww-perl, pointerize, libgd-dev, bison, ash, dpkg-awk, flex, file, debhelper, gawk, console-data
Package: boot-floppies
Architecture: all
-Depends: dpkg-dev, gcc, glibc-pic, slang1-pic, libnewt-dev, libpopt-dev, zlib1g-dev, recode, make, gettext, m4, debiandoc-sgml, libi18n-langtags-perl, man-db, libpaperg, tetex-bin, tetex-extra, perl5, libwww-perl, pointerize, libgd1g-dev, bison, ash, dpkg-awk, flex, file, debhelper, gawk, console-data
+Depends: dpkg-dev, gcc, glibc-pic, slang1-pic, libnewt-dev, libpopt-dev, zlib1g-dev, recode, make, gettext, m4, debiandoc-sgml, libi18n-langtags-perl, man-db, libpaperg, tetex-bin, tetex-extra, perl5, libwww-perl, pointerize, libgd-dev, bison, ash, dpkg-awk, flex, file, debhelper, gawk, console-data
Suggests: python-xml
Description: Scripts to create the Debian installation floppy set.
This package allows you to create a Debian installation system on floppy
Reply to: