Re: libgtk1.1
On Tue, Nov 10, 1998 at 11:11:03AM -0800, Ben Gertzfield wrote:
> >>>>> "Michael" == Michael Meskes <meskes@usa.net> writes:
>
> Ben> This is because GTK+ 1.1 is a developers' release; expect
> Ben> instabilities and incompatibilities between versions. There's
> Ben> not much we can do about it.
>
> Michael> We can. We can package it as libgtk1.12 resp. libgtk1.13
> Michael> etc. so the old version can coexist. That way we can
> Michael> follow the development without breaking the other
> Michael> packages.
>
> Well, that's a kludge that will take up huge amounts of space on
> mirrors. I guess I can do it, but I'll wait for the next gtk+ 1.1
> release.
>
> For now, feel free to file bugs on anything that's not compiled against
> gtk+ 1.1.3.
Why can't we just say 1.1.2 is in slink and all slink stuff should be
compiled against it.
And 1.1.3 or above is in potato and all stuff in it should be compiled
against it.
I've little sympathy for people hit by this library problem seeing slink
is frozen and should be getting tested, unstable doesn't need testing :)
Andrew
--
Dehydration - 34%, Recollection of previous evening - 2%, embarrassment
factor - 91%. Advise repair schedule:- off line for 36 hours, re-boot
startup disk, and replace head - wow, what a night!
-- Kryten in Red Dwarf `The Last Day'
Andrew Howell
Perth, Western Australia andrew@it.net.au
Reply to: