Re: Bug#15859: libc6 in stable is horribly broken
On Fri, Dec 12, 1997 at 03:19:29PM -0500, Chris Fearnley wrote:
> Why should libc5 conflict with libc5-dev??
It doesn't need to. The explicit version dependency in libc5-dev is
> Would this scheme improve things:
> libc5 (stable,unstable): No conflicts, no depends (pre-depends on
> ldso, of course)
> libc5-altdev: Conflicts: libc5-dev
Doesn't need to. It doesn't make any sense to do so, but there is no
reason libc5-dev and libc5-altdev can't both be installed.
> libc6: Conflicts: (libc5<<5.4.33-6)
> (Necessary due to utmp issue -- Hell, someone upgrading from a CD
> with stock 1.3.1 will be able to corrupt utmp in the current scheme
I can add this in the next release (due very soon) so let me know ASAP.
> libc6-dev: Conflicts: libc5-dev
> (libc6 development conflicts with libc5-dev -- need altdev)
Doesn't need to. Both provide and conflict with the virtual libc-dev
package for just this situation.
> BTW, who is maintaining libc5, libc6? Helmut Geyer is listed but I
> remember seeing that he has vanished??
Nobody is maintaining libc5. Volunteers have been asked for but no
one has stepped forward.
David Engel ODS Networks
email@example.com 1001 E. Arapaho Road
(972) 234-6400 Richardson, TX 75081
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
Trouble? e-mail to firstname.lastname@example.org .