On Sun, Mar 06, 2011 at 07:01:49PM +0530, Joachim Breitner wrote: > > > One solution seems to be if libgmp10-dev would provide libgmp3-dev, at > > > least until we have built a new compiler depending on libgmp10-dev (or > > > libgmp-dev) on all architectures. Would that be an option? > > > > That's not a great option because "libgmp3-dev" promises the -dev > > package strictly for libgmp3, whereas libgmp10-dev promises the -dev > > package strictly for libgmp10. I'm sorry that the dev package was > > versioned to start with and as I indicated, an unversioned virtual > > package is now provided. > > Right, therefore I am suggesting it as a work-around only until we > managed to have ghc???s depending on libgmp-dev on all architectures. Then > you can remove the Provides. I understand. > I yet have to check if the current ghc packages actually work with > libgmp10-dev instead of libgmp3-dev, otherwise this work-around would > not help. OK, please let me know the outcome of this test. > What would break? Other package build-depending on libgmp3-dev might try > to build and then fail (if they are hit by incompatibilities). But they > are not buildable now either, so while inconvenient, not a big problem. > > Any other possible consequence? No, not that I can think of. OK, so I'll make an upload with libgmp10-dev providing both libgmp-dev and libgmp3-dev. Cheers, -Steve
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature