On Sat, Feb 02, 2002 at 10:09:33PM +0000, Matthew Garrett wrote: > > Uhm, yes. Definitely should be packaged. That way we at least have a way > > to allow folks to declare (build|)dependancies on "GNU libc or libiberty". Packages never depend on libc, becuase it's a (build-)essential package. > Would it make more sense to include it in the libc package? That way we > end up with a single package that approximates the functionality of glibc, > rather than requiring several of them. I think libibery should be (build-)essential. Putting libc and libiberty in one package is wrong because they have a different upstream. I think the right way is having a libc package which depends on the libiberty package. Jeroen Dekkers -- Jabber supporter - http://www.jabber.org Jabber ID: jdekkers@jabber.org Debian GNU supporter - http://www.debian.org http://www.gnu.org IRC: jeroen@openprojects
Attachment:
pgpfaxdd7_REr.pgp
Description: PGP signature