�Stefan van der Eijk� sagte am 2002-02-20 um 10:07:39 +0800 : > Unless there is a REAL need to specify the required version of these > packages. I'm wondering what the effect of this is going to be. I'd
Define "REAL need", please. For me, it's enough that the author writes on the homepage that a specific version is needed. > be built with another version, etc). Otherwise things are going to get > overly complicated and harder to maintain when time passes. On the other In how far? Let's suppose gnome2 is out, if the new gnome-libs package is also named gnome-libs and not gnome2-libs, we might have a problem, yes. But then again, not chaning the package/provides name of a major upgrade is wrong, IMO. > hand, if you put a version requirement on the libglade-devel and > gdk-pixbuf-devel won't that then garantee that you have the correct > version of gtk+-devel and gnome-libs-devel installed (because they get > pulled in)? We could possibly also add version requirements on the other I don't know, that's why I think it's right to add version requirements as much as possible. > But wouldn't that be a bit too much? I don't think it would be too much. Actually, I think it would be right. I way too often ended up having to install additional -devel packages to be able to build a package. Alexander Skwar -- How to quote: http://learn.to/quote (german) http://quote.6x.to (english) Homepage: http://www.iso-top.de | Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] iso-top.de - Die g�nstige Art an Linux Distributionen zu kommen Uptime: 7 days 1 hour 7 minutes
