Re: new virtual package: pascal-compiler
> Christian Schwarz <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> > On Fri, 31 Oct 1997, Paul J Thompson wrote:
> > > i was looking through the virtual package list and noticed an entry
> > > for c-compiler and fortron77-compiler. since i am building the gpc
> > > package, i felt i should suggest a new virtual package name for it.
> > > this will simply be "pascal-compiler".
> > Since there will be at least two pascal compiles (gpc and p2c) I agree
> > to your request. I'll add something to the next policy weekly
> > announcement for approval.
> I disagree strongly, and feel that you're violating the procedure.
> There was supposed to be a time for objections like mine. Now for the
> technical details:
> There is no need for a virtual package unless something needs to
> depend on it. Until the need can be demonstrated a virtual package
> should not be created.
their is no such dependency...
> Are there fortran77-compiler and c-compiler virtual packages ? What
> packages depend on these ? If the answer is `none' then they should
> be removed. - And, how did they get on the list without me noticing ?
> I would have objected at the time.
I don't know about their dependencies, but the c- and fortran77-compiler
virtual packages do exist.
I didn't realize the dependancy was a required feature. I thought the virtual
package might be useful for a new user who didn't know what gpc was, but could
reognize pascal compiler. Of course, this would mean they would have to be
looking through the virtual package lines, and that probably isn't the case.
Brought to you by the letters E and K and the number 9.
Paul J. Thompson <email@example.com>
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
firstname.lastname@example.org . Trouble?
e-mail to email@example.com .