Re: [PROPOSAL] require unversioned -dev packages (was Re: library package policy for small gnome packages)
Anthony Towns <aj@azure.humbug.org.au> writes:
> On Wed, Sep 29, 1999 at 11:05:50AM +0100, Edward Betts wrote:
> > Michael Alan Dorman <mdorman@debian.org> wrote:
> > > I really think it's a bad idea to have versioned -dev packages. Have
> > > we really had instances where they have given us any real advantage?
> > libgtk1.0-dev and libgtk1.2-dev are not source compatible.
> So? How did the versioning help?
Well, actually, I think he's got a point, at least *for this
particular case*. Without a versioned -dev package, certain things
might be rendered unbuildable.
> (libc6-dev wasn't entirely source compatible between 2.0 and 2.1 --- there
> were issues with errno and so forth,
Between 2.0 and 2.1? I know that between libc5 and 6, errno's status
as a macro changed (I forget which way) to deal with threading, but I
thought 2.0 and 2.1 were explicitly compatible at the source level (if
not always at the binary level).
Mike.
Reply to: