Re: xlibmesa naming and relationships

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

On Thu, Feb 06, 2003 at 05:22:29PM +0100, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 06, 2003 at 05:14:57PM +0100, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> 
>  > You dodged my vital question again:
> 
>  lol, vital... some people take Debian too seriosly ;-)
> 
>  > 'How is the major Mesa version number relevant for the xlibmesa
>  > package name?'
> 
>  It isn't.  Going from memory, the changes between 3 and 4 were mostly
>  related to the rasterization functions, and none of those changes are
>  visible to the application.  Something similar can be said of the
>  changes between 4 and 5.  Some extensions were implemented, but because
>  of OpenGL's design that's (or should be) irrelevant.
> 
>  > Something that provides xlibmesa3-gl, for example.
> 
>  Packages shouldn't provide xlibmesa3-gl, it should provide libgl1.

And what about packages that build-depend on xlibmesa3-gl | libgl1 ?

if the autobuilder are clever enough to search a libgl1 providing
package when xlibmesa3-gl is not there, we could drop the first part
anyway ?

Friendly,

Sven Luther