[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: ed package

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

Reply to: