Re: New imlib packages -- please test
On Sun, 14 Feb 1999, Andreas Tille wrote:
> > dpkg --status gdk-imlib1
> Package: gdk-imlib1
> Status: install ok installed
> Priority: optional
> Section: libs
> Installed-Size: 193
> Maintainer: Ossama Othman <ossama@debian.org>
> Source: imlib
> Version: 1.9.3-1
> Replaces: gdk-imlib-nonfree1, libgdk-imlib-nonfree1, libgdk-imlib1
> Provides: gdk-imlib, libgdk-imlib1
> Depends: imlib-base, libc6, libglib1.1.13 (>= 1.1.15-1)
> Suggests: imlib-progs
> Conflicts: gdk-imlib-nonfree1, libgdk-imlib-nonfree1, libgdk-imlib1
> Description: Gdk-Imlib is an imaging library for use with gtk
> Gdk-Imlib is a low-level gdk interface for gtk programmers. It allows easier
> access to many graphics formats and can write to them as well.
>
> I had to install it using
> dpkg -i --force-depends
> because I use the 1.1.15-1 packages, but this shouldn't be a problem
> in my opinion.
Hmm..
a) Why did you need to force? It seems to depend on 1.1.15-1 anyhow?
b) If you did force a different version, then I would expect to see a
segfault. You can't link binaries against different versions to the ones
they think they're linked to.
> Ossama, by the way could you think about a method to have different
> GTK+1.1.? versions installed? I really hope we can get rid of this
> trouble of different versions and think we should develop a solution
> really soon. May be the feature freeze of GTK+ will help us in this
> topic something.
I have proposed a solution. If there are no objections by Tuesday or so,
I'll implement it.
Jules
/----------------+-------------------------------+---------------------\
| Jelibean aka | jules@jellybean.co.uk | 6 Evelyn Rd |
| Jules aka | jules@debian.org | Richmond, Surrey |
| Julian Bean | jmlb2@hermes.cam.ac.uk | TW9 2TF *UK* |
+----------------+-------------------------------+---------------------+
| War doesn't demonstrate who's right... just who's left. |
| When privacy is outlawed... only the outlaws have privacy. |
\----------------------------------------------------------------------/
Reply to: