On Fri, Sep 09, 2005 at 05:03:41PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> Can be done, but I didn't offer that option because I don't really
> like it. :-) At that point, I don't really see any reason to change
> the package name from what it was in sarge. (There never was a good
> reason, but it was done
On Thu, Sep 15, 2005 at 03:41:21PM -0700, Chuan-kai Lin wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 09, 2005 at 05:03:41PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > Can be done, but I didn't offer that option because I don't really
> > like it. :-) At that point, I don't really see any reason to change
> > the package name from w
Package: fam
Version: 2.7.0-8
Severity: serious
The current libfam0 provides the previous libfam0c102, presumably
because libfam is a C++ lib but only exports a C interface, so the
transition for GCC 4 was unnecessary.
However, the libfam0c102 in sarge provides libfam0. This means that
that pack
On Thu, Sep 08, 2005 at 09:06:36AM -0700, Brian Nelson wrote:
> The current libfam0 provides the previous libfam0c102, presumably
> because libfam is a C++ lib but only exports a C interface, so the
> transition for GCC 4 was unnecessary.
Yes.
> However, the libfam0c102 in sarge provides libfam0.
On Thu, Sep 08, 2005 at 04:58:07PM -0700, Chuan-kai Lin wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 08, 2005 at 09:06:36AM -0700, Brian Nelson wrote:
> > The current libfam0 provides the previous libfam0c102, presumably
> > because libfam is a C++ lib but only exports a C interface, so the
> > transition for GCC 4 was un
On Thu, Sep 08, 2005 at 09:42:28PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > > This is an exceedingly odd situation. The only solution that seems
> > > satisfactory to me is to go back to the sarge-style packaging, meaning
> > > kill the libfam0 package and re-introduce libfam0c102.
>
> > The situation is
On Fri, Sep 09, 2005 at 01:04:34PM -0700, Chuan-kai Lin wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 08, 2005 at 09:42:28PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > > > This is an exceedingly odd situation. The only solution that seems
> > > > satisfactory to me is to go back to the sarge-style packaging, meaning
> > > > kill th
7 matches
Mail list logo