Re: About to remove libg++272 from frozen
On Tue, Mar 07, 2000 at 13:07:04 +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:
> Ray, in a private mail you gave the argument, that the libg++272 shared
> library is needed by older propriatary software.
The proprietary software I had in mind was Netscape's browsers. It is
possible that there is still other proprietary software in use that is
dependant on libg++272, but I'm not aware of such software.
> I am ok with removing g++272 and libg++272-{dev,dbg} from potato, but
> should the shared library be removed as well?
Well, we can't have packages in potato that can't be built with potato. It's
probably easiest to remove it and put a note in the release notes pointing
to slink for a .deb of the shared library.
Ray
--
ART A friend of mine in Tulsa, Okla., when I was about eleven years old.
I'd be interested to hear from him. There are so many pseudos around taking
his name in vain.
- The Hipcrime Vocab by Chad C. Mulligan
Reply to: