Hi Torsten, Torsten Werner wrote: > On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 3:33 PM, Archive > Administrator<[email protected]> wrote: >> (new) libjgrapht0.6-java-link_0.6.0-7_all.deb optional libs > > have we already agreed on such packages? Why don't we just ship an > unversioned libjgrapht-java package without the -link suffix?
this was my very latest change to the packaging. I had felt that when the user apt-get installs libjgrapht-java, he should be asked about the version he wants to install. Also, I did not want to disturb packages that depend on libjgrapht-java today. If I had libjgrapht-java provided by the libjgrapht0.6-java package and by libjgrapht0.7-java, then an apt-get dist-upgrade would render something previously working suddenly unusable. Many greetings Steffen -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
