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