Re: RFC: groff split (was Re: Packaging WM themes - question)

[cjw44@flatline.org.uk (Colin Watson)]

Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au> wrote:
>Colin Watson <cjw44@flatline.org.uk> wrote:
>> Keeping gxditview in groff is also compelling from the point of view of
>> an upgrade path, now that I think of it, since a potato user who takes
>> no special action on upgrade will have the same set of groff-related
>> tools installed afterwards as beforehand.
>
>As long as you don't introduce dependencies on xlibs I'll be happy.

groff-base will certainly not; I had, however, expected whatever package
contains gxditview to depend on xlibs ...

-- 
Colin Watson                                     [cjw44@flatline.org.uk]