Carl Fink <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Wed, Feb 28, 2001 at 12:06:08PM -0800, Terry Hancock wrote:
>> The reason is that the unstable packages seem to have the assumption
>> built into them that they will never be used on a stable distr system
>> -- that is they have dependencies on later version
Terry Hancock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>The reason is that the unstable packages seem to have the assumption
>built into them that they will never be used on a stable distr system
>-- that is they have dependencies on later versions of basic packages.
Consider this for a moment; how should unsta
On Wed, Feb 28, 2001 at 12:06:08PM -0800, Terry Hancock wrote:
> The reason is that the unstable packages seem to
> have the assumption built into them that they
> will never be used on a stable distr system --
> that is they have dependencies on later versions
> of basic packages.
This has irri
Terry Hancock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> In many cases these seem to be frivolous assumptions.
> It seems very implausible to me (for example)
> that compiling libsdl1.1 _really_ requires
> libc6 >= 2.1.97. I'm pretty sure that, installing
> from source, libc6 version 2.1.3 (in Debian 2.2)
> w
Hi,
I have only one computer (working anyway), which I
use for fairly important information. So, I use
the stable Debian distribution on it.
However, I also do development on this machine, so
I often need later versions of libraries and so
on that I'm using in my projects. If I could just
install
5 matches
Mail list logo