Hi, Am Donnerstag, den 20.08.2009, 16:24 +0100 schrieb Chris Lamb: > Joachim Breitner wrote: > > By now, i’m of the opinion that a simple meta-debian-package, > > without any ghc-pkg interaction, that pulls in the right -dev and > > binary packages without any versioning should be fine. > > I like this. > > I wonder if we could we have our cake and eat it - if the binary package > Provides: libghc6-haskell-platform-dev [..], then scripts (or users!) > that assumes libghc6-${CABAL_NAME}-dev might work. I don’t think it makes sense: A libghc6-blubb-dev package indicates a package in the ghc-pkg sense name blubb (or haskell-blubb). If we don’t actually ship the haskell platform ghc-pkg package, but rather a meta package in the Debian sense that pulls in the correct packages, this would rather be confusing than helpful. Greetings, Joachim -- Joachim "nomeata" Breitner Debian Developer nomeata@debian.org | ICQ# 74513189 | GPG-Keyid: 4743206C JID: nomeata@joachim-breitner.de | http://people.debian.org/~nomeata
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil