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

Re: libc6 migration -- xlib

> 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

But then anyone "upgrading" xlib6 (the 6 for x11r6, not libc6!) will
end up with a libc6 version; Is that what we want to happen?

> > alt-xlib6-dev that replaces and provides xlib6-dev (which alt-libc5
> No, alt-xlib6-dev should _NOT_ conflict/replace/provide xlib6-dev. It

God, these names are awful.  I'm not sure I have any idea what you
meant by that :-)  So given the choices of:
	a) normal-paths libc5-xlib-dev
	b) alt-paths libc5-xlib-dev
	c) normal-paths libc6-xlib-dev
You could install a+b, or b+c, but no other combination?

> > 	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) :(.

Better make that policy then -- since I'm pretty sure I saw "no a.out
support in debian 2.0" go by earlier...  Still, dlltools is up to
current standards and as long as they hold, we can assume that anyone
using dlltools still has libc5 installed.

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: