Re: [Pkg-clamav-devel] The future of clamav wrt. stable/volatile
- To: pkg-clamav-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org, debian-release@lists.debian.org
- Subject: Re: [Pkg-clamav-devel] The future of clamav wrt. stable/volatile
- From: aCaB <acab@digitalfuture.it>
- Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2009 15:55:19 +0100
- Message-id: <49870957.8020305@digitalfuture.it>
- In-reply-to: <20090131121204.GG47221@l03.thnet>
- References: <20090125141325.GC38667@l03.local> <slrngo1d84.3jl.jmm@inutil.org> <20090128220004.GK27311@apu.snow-crash.org> <24725-SnapperMsgD8DB99B6C5A691B2@[75.198.253.38]> <20090129175336.GA2892@durotan.0x539.de> <20090129190138.GB18109@www.lobefin.net> <20090130012050.GA14099@pwness> <20090131121204.GG47221@l03.thnet>
Michael Tautschnig wrote:
> There is just a slightly archive-specific problem: A package in main must not
> depend on something outside main (at least so I guess, I couldn't find the docs
> stating this rightaway). We'd thus need some clamav package in main, and not
> only in volatile. Which more or less is the situation we have today.
Mmmmk, then forget what i've said. It indeed doesn't make much sense
anymore.
> To me, the approach of moving clamav + all its rdepends to volatile really looks
> like the only option.
Yeah, I agree.
-acab
Reply to: