Please reply to the debian-x mailing list, not to me privately. On Fri, Sep 22, 2000 at 12:32:04PM +0200, Vedran Rodic wrote: > On Fri, Sep 22, 2000 at 01:52:12AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: > > There is not yet official Debian policy on this matter, but I'm starting to > > realize we need one. I think Debian should follow the existing standard as > > drafted by SGI; any additional shared libraries not covered by that ABI should be > > shipped in separate Debian packages, so that all ABI-compliant > > implementations can Provide: the virtual package "libgl1". > > > > Hmm... That would require NVIDIA to ship their version of libGLU, right? > But the trouble is, i don't think they have one :( There is this free version, > they could probably include it if there aren't licensing problems. There probably are not. Anyway, it's irrelevant because the OpenGL ABI says you must provide both libGL and libGLU. > You're right about everything you advise, but libglx.a and libGLcore.a are > actually dynamically loaded libraries :) But they're not loaded via ld.so, and they are not used to generate shared library dependencies in Debian packages. This is an important distinction. To properly discuss these issues, one needs to be familiar with both the OpenGL ABI and with the Debian packaging system. -- G. Branden Robinson | The only way to get rid of a temptation Debian GNU/Linux | is to yield to it. branden@deadbeast.net | -- Oscar Wilde http://deadbeast.net/~branden/ |
Attachment:
pgpz8fLoos7n6.pgp
Description: PGP signature