Re: xlibmesa naming and relationships
On Son, 2003-02-02 at 16:49, Sven Luther wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 02, 2003 at 04:17:52PM +0100, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> > > (I got to get myself a Radeon before that happens[0]) and that's just
> > > easier if I have a separate GLU package. The other reason was to have
> > > a GLU package that the nvidia packages can depend on. I *hate* the way
> > > the current packages work (depending on the xlibmesa packages just to
> > > divert their libGL files out of the way).
> >
> > I don't have anything against the separate GLU packages, on the
> > contrary, I appreciate it a lot for the DRI snapshot packages, where I
> > had to use similar ugly tricks.
> >
> > My point is that the semantics of the libgl1 virtual package have
> > changed from 'libGL.so.1 and libGLU.so.1' to 'libGL.so.1 only', which
> > breaks packages that depend on libgl1 only but need libGLU. Did you
> > consider this, and what were your plans to handle it?
>
> Fix the packages that depend on it ? I already did so with my packages,
> anyway, you have to changes the dependencies, since you don't have
> xlibmesa but xlibmesa-gl and xlibmesa-glu, now (and yes, i (build) depend on
> xlibmesa-gl | libgl1 and so).
Sure, packages will get the correct dependencies, but the same would be
true for a new libgl1-noglu virtual package. Why break libgl1
deliberately?
--
Earthling Michel Dänzer (MrCooper)/ Debian GNU/Linux (powerpc) developer
XFree86 and DRI project member / CS student, Free Software enthusiast
Reply to: