Am Montag, 09.06.03 um 19:11 Uhr schrieb David R. Morrison:
Here's the point: there is a new version of gettext with a new major versionStill don't see the point: if at some point we have a gettext2-shlibs, then it will at some point become essential, too. Period. The "old" gettext-shlibs wouldn't stop being essentia - after all, why should it? The only reason would be "shorter bootstrap time" - but I don't think it would actually work, unless the new gettext is 100% source compatible, we'd still need the old gettext anyway.
number for the library. In an ideal world, we would have gettext-shlibs,
gettext-dev, gettext2-shlibs, and gettext2-dev all available. (This is
what I am trying to achieve, in fact.)
Now, which of these are essential? Well, clearly we don't want the -dev
packages to be essential. We *do* want the gettext-shlibs to be essential
for now, since dpkg depends on it. However, at some future date we will
probably want to compile dpkg with gettext2-shlibs instead of gettext-shlibs,
and so we'll want to change which one is essential. If other packages
have not been required to specify their dependency on gettext-shlibs, things
will break at that stage.
Max
------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Etnus, makers of TotalView, The best thread debugger on the planet. Designed with thread debugging features you've never dreamed of, try TotalView 6 free at www.etnus.com. _______________________________________________ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
