Re: Once again: libc6 packages compatibility etc...
On Wed 01 Oct 1997, Brian White wrote:
> > But that's what we are doing by using this "g" convention anyway !
> >
> > When I advocate concistency, it's just to prevent having libc5/6
> > distinction done by some maintainers using "g", and by others by
> > suppressing any superfluous "lib" in the package's name.
>
> So, is the "g" suffix intended to be used forever after? Once libc5 is
> dead and gone, are we still to end every library in "g"?
suggestion :
we can drop the altdev and libc5 support in 2.1, at least the
development stuff. if a new major version of a library comes out, we
should also drop the support, but not before 2.0 is released.
the postifx "g" can only go away with new major versions
(a libc5 and a libc6 version may never have the same package name).
neither a new minor version (liek qt 1.30) nor a new major version
before hamm is frozen (like tcl/tk8.0) are reasons to drop libc5
support. (except : if it is too much work :-)
andreas
--
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: