Re: libc6_2.0.106-0.1_i386.deb is released
On 17 Dec 1998, Gordon Matzigkeit wrote:
> Hi!
>
> >>>>> Santiago Vila writes:
>
> SV> Please, do not upload them to the main archives untile they have
> SV> proper names, compatible with the earlier ones: glibc2,
> SV> glibc2-dev and such.
>
> ... but the whole point of this particular libc package is that it is
> backwards compatible with the existing Debian GNU/Linux pre-2.1
> packages. This will allow us to merge our changes into Dale Scheetz's
> official pre-2.1 package when it comes out, rather than maintaining a
> separate glibc package.
Of course, and this is great!
> Wouldn't the right thing be to add a ``Replaces: glibc2'' line to my
> package, rather than making the package names inconsistent with the
> Linux versions?
The package names have not to be consistent with Linux, because GNU/Hurd
has nothing to do with Linux-the-kernel.
The shlibs mechanism will make sure that packages compiled with glibc2 for
the Hurd (either natively or by cross-compiling) will have the right
"Depends: glibc2" in the control file.
We already did this for glibc 2.0.4, and it worked, and I don't see any
reason to change this. IMHO, we should have "glibc2" and not "libc6"
under GNU/Hurd.
Just remember to make glibc2-dev to Provide: libc6-dev, since there are
still some packages having a hardcoded dependency on libc6-dev.
[ Also, remember to change also the shlibs file accordingly so that
it reads "glibc2 (>= 2.0.106)" ].
--
"1a144b8b937a301b5c9e9a19730e9119" (a truly random sig)
Reply to: