The 64 Studio 2.1 stable repository provides libart-2.0-2 2.3.19-3~bpo.1, while the dev package is version is 2.3.17-1.
The 64 Studio 2.1 testing, src testing, Lenny and Lenny backports repositories might provide the wanted version for the dev package. I didn't check it. If so, than I can't see something speaking against the use of the dev package that fit to the runtime lib. Can there be a reason why the dev package shouldn't be the same like the runtime lib? Tow days ago I tried to install livemix by an Ubuntu package, while I just enabled 64 Studio stable, Etch and Etch/Updates. It was installed broken, because of missing dependencies, so I does a complete remove. I don't think that livemix will provide e.g. libart-2.0-2 2.3.19-3~bpo.1, so that my new install is broken because of this. I checked http://apt.64studio.com/64studio/stable/pool/main/l/libart-lgpl/ to see which version is provided by the stable repository and found out, that it's the stable repository its self that provides libart-2.0-2 2.3.19-3~bpo.1.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ 64studio-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.64studio.com/mailman/listinfo/64studio-users
