RE: Request for a DFB version of libcairo2

["Viti Davide" <Davide.Viti@siemens.com>]

> On 6/9/06, Viti Davide <Davide.Viti@siemens.com> wrote:
> > Do you think I would have said that without having checked before?
> 
> You haven't made it easy to let us understand that you did.

Here's a snippet of the message you're referring to:
"> Only two pc files and two libs, right?"
"No: include files differ."

I said they differ; if you don't trust what I said is up to you to
double check it yourself.

> So the conclusion is that, because the cairo-features.h and 
> the cairo libraries have the same name, there should be two 
> -dev packages after all... 

Yes. I would say that there should be two different packages not
Just because of the conflicting names, but mainly because I would
Not want the -directf libs if my system does not use directfb.

> each with its own pc file, lib 
> file(s) and headers. These should be installable on the same 
> system... (or am I wrong again?), thus the cairo headers will 
> probably be placed under distict directories under 
> usr/include (same for libs, but adapted and probably the 
> directfb library can be renamed).

(With my poor knowledge of packages and policy) I would use
/usr/include/directfb which is already used by directfb itself.

Davide