Re: Once again: libc6 packages compatibility etc...
On Tue, 16 Sep 1997, Brian White wrote:
> > > If I follow Brian's idea I will have the following:
> > >
> > > libgmp1_1.3.2-6 libc5 version
> > > libgmp1-dev_1.3.2-6
> > > and
> > > gmp2_2.0.2-3 libc6 version
> > > gmp-dev_2.0.2-3
> > >
> > > These can both reside in the libs section without confusion, since they
> > > will clearly be in seperate portions of the list.
> > >
> > > Doesn't this remove the need for the g and alt identifier strings?
> >
> > Yes, but I think it would be a bad idea to deviate from -altdev at
> > this point. Telling users some "altdev" packages use -altdev while
> > some others use -dev would probably only confuse them more than they
> > already will be.
>
> This would be a much bigger problem with a released distribution. Since
> hamm is still "unstable", only developers and other suckers for punishment
> are currently using it.
But there are packages whose name doesn't begin with "lib" (for example
xlib6, xpm4) so those can't use the newly proposed method.
--
Enrique Zanardi ezanardi@noah.dfis.ull.es
Dpto. Fisica Fundamental y Experimental
Univ. de La Laguna
--
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: