On 17 Dec 1998, Gordon Matzigkeit wrote: > Hi! > > >>>>> Santiago Vila writes: > > SV> Please, do not upload them to the main archives untile they have > SV> proper names, compatible with the earlier ones: glibc2, > SV> glibc2-dev and such. > > ... but the whole point of this particular libc package is that it is > backwards compatible with the existing Debian GNU/Linux pre-2.1 > packages. This will allow us to merge our changes into Dale Scheetz's > official pre-2.1 package when it comes out, rather than maintaining a > separate glibc package.
Of course, and this is great! > Wouldn't the right thing be to add a ``Replaces: glibc2'' line to my > package, rather than making the package names inconsistent with the > Linux versions? The package names have not to be consistent with Linux, because GNU/Hurd has nothing to do with Linux-the-kernel. The shlibs mechanism will make sure that packages compiled with glibc2 for the Hurd (either natively or by cross-compiling) will have the right "Depends: glibc2" in the control file. We already did this for glibc 2.0.4, and it worked, and I don't see any reason to change this. IMHO, we should have "glibc2" and not "libc6" under GNU/Hurd. Just remember to make glibc2-dev to Provide: libc6-dev, since there are still some packages having a hardcoded dependency on libc6-dev. [ Also, remember to change also the shlibs file accordingly so that it reads "glibc2 (>= 2.0.106)" ]. -- "1a144b8b937a301b5c9e9a19730e9119" (a truly random sig)
