Re: X Strike Force X.Org X11 SVN commit: r317 - in trunk/debian: . patches
On Wed, Jul 06, 2005 at 03:39:34PM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> Of the library packages, only xlibmesa-glu depends on libstdc++. In fact,
> it's the only C++ package in the entire xorg tree.
> xlibmesa-glu
> -- This will need a new package name. It has a really weird package
> name right now, so that's good anyway. Ubuntu used libglu1-xorg, which
> sounds good to me. :-)
> -- And the new package will need to Conflicts:/Replaces: with the old
> package.
> -- Ubuntu also made this "Provides: libglu1c2" instead of "Provides:
> libglu1". This makes sense since there are alternative
> providers of libGLU.1.
Right.
> xlibmesa-glu-dev
> -- A new name is desirable because we're cleaning up the package
> name. Probably Conflicts:/Provides:/Replaces: in this case.
> Ubuntu used libglu-dev-xorg, which sounds good to me.
Actually, I'm a muppet. Mesa uses libglu1-mesa-dev, so we should use
libglu1-xorg-dev, and I'll clean up the mess in Ubuntu.
> xlibmesa-glu-dbg
> -- Likewise, new name and Conflicts:/Replaces:. Ubuntu used
> libglu1-dbg-xorg, which sounds good to me.
Ditto -- should probably be libglu1-xorg-dbg.
> This migration was done in Ubuntu's 6.8.2-11. Along with gobs of other
> stuff, of course.
Don't remind me ...
daniels@brainfreeze:~/canonical/xorg% debdiff hoary/xorg_6.8.2-10.dsc xorg_6.8.2-35.dsc | diffstat | tail -1
435 files changed, 189075 insertions(+), 36648 deletions(-)
> x-window-system (metapackage) depends on xdm
> xprint-common (from xprint) depends on xbase-clients,
> and xprt depends on xprt-common
> -- Incidentally, the xprint dependencies are *broken* in the current tree,
> since xprint-common doesn't provide xprt-common.
> xprt should "Depends: xprint-common | xpt-common", I think.
I've stopped building Xprint together, to let it be externally
maintained by Drew, or whoever else cares about it. This necessitated
killing off libxaw8, which was really easy.
I've also killed dps, dpstk, Xxf86rush, and maybe a couple of others.
> > Daniel and Ubuntu have already made the transition, and
> > if it doesn't involve very much then we can get it done quickly.
>
> I believe he's included a number of GCC4 build fixes, some of which may be
> needed.
Uhm? No, none, actually. Although there is apparently some breakage
deep in the VGA routing code ...
Reply to: