[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: JOEL BAKER, STOP TELLING PEOPLE TO DEPEND ON LIBC-DEV *INSTEAD* OF LIBC6-DEV



On Mon, Oct 14, 2002 at 05:50:26PM -0600, Joel Baker wrote:

> > If you want to specify which of a set of real packages should be the default 
> > to satisfy a particular dependency on a virtual package, you should list the 
> > real package as an alternative before the virtual one.

> However, as read, this would make little or not sense as to why one cannot
> (or even should not) use libc-dev instead of libc*-dev unless you need a
> versioned dependancy - since all libc*-dev should Provide: libc-dev, and
> there should be exactly one that applies to any given arch, there is no
> "preference" that would make any sense for all arches.

As a technicality, depending on libc-dev is wrong because there is
always *one* *specific* real package that fulfills the proper
relationship on each architecture.  You cannot substitute a different
-dev package for libc6.1 on an alpha and get correct results.

Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer

Attachment: pgpMzgZ9r36Nt.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: