Re: Can we upload binaries using libc6 to hamm yet?
On Apr 24, Guy Maor wrote
> David Engel <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> > However, I'm not convinced that we should also support
> > libc5-based -dev packages with their files in old locations nor
> > libc6-based -dev packages with their files in alternative locations.
> It seems to me that it's little extra work to provide libc5-dev and
> libc6alt-dev if you already intend to provide libc5alt-dev and
I disagree. We are already going to double the number of -dev
packages to keep versions for both libc5 and libc6, at least for a
while. Now, you're proposing doubling that again, for a total of four
times what we have currently. That's a LOT of new packages to
upload/download, take up disk space and keep track of.
> I think you underestimate the number in Thomas' situation. Many of us
> do important, non-Debian, work on our machines and don't want to risk
> breaking the ability to compile. I think many people will install a
> libc6alt-dev package rather than libc6-dev and libc5alt-dev packages
> simply to avoid the risk of the unknown.
Nobody is proposing to break your ability to compile. You could still
compile with libc5 if you choose, it just won't be the default. BTW,
what would be wrong with compiling your non-Debian code with libc6
anyway? If you're concerned about stability, you shouldn't be.
David Engel ODS Networks
email@example.com 1001 E. Arapaho Road
(972) 234-6400 Richardson, TX 75081
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
Trouble? e-mail to firstname.lastname@example.org .