Re: Q. about the way libc6 is packaged (looking for inspiration)
On Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 01:57:40AM -0400, James Antill wrote:
> > > So I'm thinking about splitting into:
> > >
> > > libicu16: just the lib*.so.*
> > > icu: the rest, depends on libicu16.
> >
> > This is the correct way to do it.
>
> Doesn't this mean that you have to upgrade both packages if you need
> to change the *.so.* files in a binary incompatible manner.
Even if it was only one package you'd have to upgrade it. When the library
is split out, other packages can depend only on it, without drawing in the
unneeded stuff.
> Ie. wouldn't it be better to have something like...
>
> libicu: virtual package, requires icu and libicu16
>
> ...or am I missing something.
That's not how the virtual packages are used usually... note also that users
don't know much about virtual packages, since they don't see them in package
selection programs.
--
Digital Electronic Being Intended for Assassination and Nullification
Reply to: