On Thu, Jan 17, 2002 at 12:03:05PM -0600, Steve Langasek wrote: > Incidentally, why is the source package called 'gphoto2'? I see that > there is still a 'gphoto' package in Debian; is that not superseded by > gphoto 2.0? Are there reasons that someone would need both gphoto and > gphoto2 installed on their system, or why some people need one and > others need the other? Yes, please don't remove gphoto yet! gphoto2 is still beta and my camera, a Sony DSC-F1, is quite old and does not yet work with the new gphoto2 package. There may be others too. But gphoto does not work with many newer cameras, so it is important that gphoto2 is available too for those people. I haven't yet filed a bugreport because I'm not sure where the problem lies: with the packaging or the camera driver itself, and I was waiting for the newer version to be packaged before bugging anyone. Chris -- Chris Halls | Frankfurt, Germany
Attachment:
pgpSJcFBKUpmc.pgp
Description: PGP signature