Re: should automake1.6 "provide" automake?
On Mon, 24 Jun 2002 23:24:59 -0400
Eric Dorland <dorland@lords.com> wrote:
> > > One then that I could do that hasn't been suggested yet is making
> > > another virtual package called "automaken" and have all the
> > > automakes provide that. When a package needs an unversioned
> > > dependency on automake then could just use that (similar to emacs'
> > > "emacsen"). Is this a better solution?
> >
> > Apart from the unappealing aesthetics, this is not really different
> > from my proposed solution. We could
> >
> > a) have automake1.6 provide automake
> > Ramifications: a package that build-depends on automake, but really wants
> > automake1.4 must be modified to use a versioned depend.
I have an impression that automake1.6 is really non-compatible with automake1.5
AM_INIT_AUTOMAKE format has changed between 1.5 and 1.6
regards,
junichi
--
dancer@debian.org http://www.netfort.gr.jp/~dancer
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: