On Thu, Jan 08, 2004 at 07:35:45PM +0100, Sylvain LE GALL wrote: > On Thu, Jan 08, 2004 at 07:08:05PM +0100, Claudio Sacerdoti Coen wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I do not really see the point of renaming lablgtk2 to lablgtk. > > Other gtk/gnome-based packages are now called *2. > > > > What about this alternative proposal? > > > > 1. add a new package camlimages1 linked against lablgtk. > > 2. make cameleon depend on camlimages1 > > 3. link camlimages to lablgtk2 > > > > and, as soon as cameleon is completely ported to lablgtk2 > > > > 4. upload a new version of cameleon that depends on camlimages and lablgtk2 > > 5. drop camlimages1 and lablgtk from testing > > > > Chances are that 4 and 5 will be done before the freeze. > > In the meantim 1-3 is a reasonable state (and everything is always > > freezed in the meantime). > > > > Hello again, > > Well a idea just hit me ... > > What about : > camlimages ( normal ) > camlimages-lablgtk ( just contains the part linked with lablgtk ) > camlimages-lablgtk2 ( just contains the part linked with lablgtk2 ) > > camlimages-lablgtk conflicts with camlimages-lablgtk2 > > During the build you begin to build with lablgtk, then switch to > lablgtk2 and only rebuild part depending on this switch. It will save > compilation time. > > This way we can keep the two version. > > In fact, there is only one modules that depends on lablgtk...
Sounds like a really good plan. Please go ahead. BTW, i have a question concerning your NM status. On what stage of it are you ? Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]