On Fri, Jul 15, 2005 at 02:04:14PM -0400, David Nusinow wrote: > On Fri, Jul 15, 2005 at 10:59:21AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 15, 2005 at 07:21:28PM +0200, Klaus Ethgen wrote: > > > I will try to make a dummy-package which provides xlibmesa-glu and > > > depends on libglu1-xorg. ;-) > > Why do people think that xorg broke library dependencies for our > > entertainment, and that patching over the dependencies is an ok solution? > > The package name changed because it is *not* *compatible*. No one said the > > C++ transition was supposed to be fun, did they? > I'm mainly depressed that people aren't reading Planet Debian, or are just > ignoring it. Is there a better place to post this sort of thing so that > users don't keep repeating the same non-bug? The BTS obviously isn't > working for us here either, nor is posting to debian-x. > I think I'll have to put something in X.Org's NEWS.Debian about it at the > very least, but if anyone has any ideas for this, I'm all ears. I refuse to > resort to a debconf warning for this, but I'm running out of ideas. I agree that d-d-a is probably reasonable for this. I'm sure it won't give you 100% coverage, given that there are users posting to random lists like debian-testing about the matter (...), but I imagine it will help more people get a grasp of "unstable". :) -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature