Re: dpkg and dependencies
On Thu, 5 Sep 1996, Guy Maor wrote:
> [very helpful description of dependencies deleted]
> I agree with Ian's definition.
me to. :-)
> The alternative is unpleasant - a multitude of tiny packages.
nevertheless dpkg should be divided into two binary packages:
dpkg (which is the most esential base package of all :-), and
dpkg-source, which only the developers will want to have.
this way the dependencies (while different) could eventually
Juergen Menden | Disclaimer: The opinions expressed by me,
tel: +49 (89) 289 - 22387 +-----------+ are (usually) not the opinions
e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org | of anyone else on this planet.
Hi! I'm a .signature virus! Add me to your .signature and join in the fun!