On Tue, Aug 04, 2009 at 07:21:17PM +0200, Luk Claes wrote: > Bill Allombert wrote: > > On Sun, Jun 14, 2009 at 09:30:33PM +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote: > >> On Sun, Jun 14, 2009 at 08:22:04PM +0100, Jurij Smakov wrote: > >>>> Those build-depend on libjpeg62-dev | libjpeg-dev: > >>>> Package: csmash > >>>> Package: djvulibre > >>>> Package: epm > >>>> Package: flightgear > >>>> Package: iceape > >>>> Package: libmng > >>>> Package: metapixel > >>>> Package: simgear > >>>> Package: uvccapture > >>>> Package: wine > >>>> Package: xmhtml > >>>> Package: ygraph > > >>>> And a vast majority of packages build-depend on libjpeg62-dev (that is > >>>> roughly 220 packages if I'm correct). > > Are bugs for these filed already to have them build depend on libjpeg-dev? not by me. > > I suppose it can be safely argued that breaking binary compatibility once > > in ten years is better than breaking them every years. > > > >> We will probably need to keep a libjpeg62 around in squeeze btw, as it's > >> likely that some external stuff will require it... > > Do you know examples of these? I fear that stuff like oracle installer or older vmware versions or similar stuff would be affected. -- Intersec <http://www.intersec.com> Pierre Habouzit <pierre.habouzit@intersec.com> Tél : +33 (0)1 5570 3346 Mob : +33 (0)6 1636 8131 Fax : +33 (0)1 5570 3332 37 Rue Pierre Lhomme 92400 Courbevoie
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature