Re: Package Reorganisations
On Sat, Feb 03, 2001 at 11:04:43AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> A lot of these updates seem to be breaking forwards compatibility in the
> sense that they require lots of packages to be rebuilt on some or all
> architectures. For example the X update means dependencies on xlib6g and
> xpm4g have to be changed to dependencies on xlibs: for xlib6g there's a
> dummy package to handle this, for xpm4g recompiles have to be done [0].
> the packages that depend on xpm4g seem to be:
>
> i386:
> netscape4 xcopilot
Note that the dependency switch from xpm4g to libxpm4 (or xlibs) was planned
months ago and it could have been done in _potato_, because xpm4g's shlibs
file contained a dependency on libxpm4 which was not versioned and dpkg can
handle those just fine with `Provides: libxpm4', which has been added to
both the old xpm4g package and the new xlibs package.
On related note, why is it so unreasonable to expect the buildd people to
keep their build systems synced with the current stable as a minimum, and
with current unstable if they're building packages for unstable...
--
Digital Electronic Being Intended for Assassination and Nullification
Reply to: