Re: xlibmesa naming and relationships

[Sven Luther <luther@dpt-info.u-strasbg.fr>]

On Sun, Feb 02, 2003 at 03:05:59PM +0100, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
> Hi Michel,
> 
>  thanks for the Cc: ...
> 
> >> Michel Dänzer <daenzer@debian.org> writes:
> 
>  > > I still don't get it. There's no incompatibility between
>  > > xlibmesa3-gl, xlibmesa4-gl and xlibmesa5-gl to come, so what's the
>  > > point of the different names? The worst thing IMHO is
>  > > x-window-system-core depending on one particular of these, but I
>  > > think it would be much easier for everyone if we had a common name
>  > > which reflects the libGL API used.
> 
>  Don't look at me.  The "3" in the mesa packages makes me puke.  It's
>  old historical baggage (you probably know why it's there in the first
>  place -- but don't ask me why the xlibmesa packages have that ugly 3 or
>  4 or whatever in them).  As you are well aware of, changing a package's
>  name in Debian is next to impossilbe.  Provides isn't enough because
>  versioned provides don't exist, and that's because everytime the topic

And because the autobuilders don't like virtual build dependencies,
which is, i think, a worse problem.

Friendly,

Sven Luther