OT: don't read (Was: Re: BUG: libkdeprint_management.la missing in kdelibs4)
- To: email@example.com
- Subject: OT: don't read (Was: Re: BUG: libkdeprint_management.la missing in kdelibs4)
- From: "J. Woch" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Wed, 05 Feb 2003 08:58:26 +0100
- Message-id: <200302050758.h157wWf1030121@server.los-wochos.de>
- References: <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com>
Chris Cheney wrote at Wednesday 05 February 2003 07:50:
> On Wed, Feb 05, 2003 at 07:27:54AM +0100, Ralf Nolden wrote:
>> [...] I suggested packaging the
>> libqt.a and libqt-mt.a into a libqt3-static-dev package but Martin still
>> refuses "because the policy says to put it in the -dev package".
>> I can't argue against stubbornness, I can just say that two weeks
>> discussing about every single file in this package drives me nuts,
>> especially if debian people never use what they package and thus will
>> never gain any clue what to do with it best.
> Yes, Martin is correct about that being a violation of policy, most
> (all?) other libraries don't split their headers into a bunch of
> individual packages either, but ymmv.
Well, dealing with its own policies religiously is one of Debian's
specialities (besides being the best distribution on earth). However,
Debian wouldn't be the first reigion which breaks utterly against reality