On Sun, Jun 22, 2003 at 10:12:44PM +0200, Michel Dänzer wrote: > On Sun, 2003-06-22 at 20:40, Branden Robinson wrote: > > IMO it's stupid to ship glu.h if we're not going to ship the rest of the > > library. > > This change doesn't ship it though, does it? Not in the package, but the fact that the upstream install rules think it's getting shipped smacks of cognitive dissonance. > > (Why can't XFree86 Build-Depend on libglu1-mesa-dev?) > > Actually, I think it'd have to Build-Depend on libglu-dev for glxinfo. Shouldn't those be the same thing, once GLU is killed off from XFree86's own tree? > > I object to killing off the X-forked GLU package at this point for that reason > > and others. > > I'm looking forward to hearing them. I've shared some reasons in other recent mails. > Anyway, I agree that the commit in this form was probably premature and > we should work this out in a branch first. I'm glad to see I am not alone in this opinion. -- G. Branden Robinson | I'm sorry if the following sounds Debian GNU/Linux | combative and excessively personal, branden@debian.org | but that's my general style. http://people.debian.org/~branden/ | -- Ian Jackson
Attachment:
pgpFJ2lpTpHJ2.pgp
Description: PGP signature