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

Re: libc6 migration -- xlib

On Mon, 19 May 1997, Mark W. Eichin wrote:

> Is there a web page or other document that explains what our strategy
> for libc6 is?  I'm not talking about random comments on the list, I
> mean something nailed down that I can refer to...
> In particular, I've got a few issues to work out.
> 	1) libgdbm -- libc6 includes libdb, and therefore gdbm is
> supposed to be unnecessary.  If this is true, it needs to be written
> down, so I can point people at it -- otherwise, I need a strategy for
> renaming the package (since there needs to be a libgdbm.so for libc5
> and a seperate one for libc6... the former isn't changing, obviously;
> how do we change the latter so that "-lgdbm" still works for users
> building against it? [since db can't read gdbm files, that *will*
> continue to happen.])

The general policy is that libc5 stuff should go in
/usr/i486-linuxlibc1/lib. So that's where you put all the stuff compiled
against libc5.

> 	2) X -- a full release of X requires tk41-dev to build
> XF86Setup (it uses the static lib, so the end-user doesn't need it.)
> But tk41-dev probably won't be available for libc6 until I release X.
> Ooops :-)  I can hand-release xlib6-dev by itself, (into experimental,
> perhaps?) so that someone can build the tk packages... or I can build
> that particular lib by hand until then (but then would still have to
> leave X in experimental unless I took over the package, eww.)  And
> what *do* I name things?  I'd guess that xlib6 is untouched, the
> version built with libc6 gets called xlib6-libc6 (eww), I release an

No. xlib6 should be for libc6 (more long-term solution). Then create an
xlib6-libc5. How we handle the dependencies for this, I don't know. Fix
for all packages which require libc5 still, and recompile those which can
work with libc6 would be the best idea.

> alt-xlib6-dev that replaces and provides xlib6-dev (which alt-libc5
> doesn't?) and then xlib6-dev can be the new version?  Am I missing
> anything?

No, alt-xlib6-dev should _NOT_ conflict/replace/provide xlib6-dev. It
should install into /usr/i486-linuxlibc1/..., or something (maybe
/usr/X11R6/i486-linuxlibc1), and it should co-exist with xlib6-dev.
ld.so can work out which to use.

> 	3) can I drop the a.out-only "dlltools" package now? :-)

No. It is needed to build a.out versions of, e.g. svgalib. Some older
binary-only programs only come in a.out format (Doom, for example) :(.

Tom Lees <tom@lpsg.demon.co.uk>			http://www.lpsg.demon.co.uk/
PGP ID 87D4D065, fingerprint 2A 66 86 9D 02 4D A6 1E  B8 A2 17 9D 4F 9B 89 D6
finger tom@master.debian.org for full public key (also available on keyservers)

TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org . 
Trouble?  e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .

Reply to: