On Jun 30 09:02, David Rothenberger wrote: > On 6/30/2009 1:30 AM, Corinna Vinschen wrote: >> Here, the aprutil1 package still exists in the 1.7 release area, but >> I don't think it makes sense anymore, along the same lines as for >> libapr1. I think it should be ok to remove it from the 1.7 release. >> What do you say? > > The aprutil1 and apr1 packages are just transition packages to help > people upgrade from the old package naming schema to the new one. They > don't need to be in the 1.7 area if we believe everyone will have > updated their apr1 and aprutil1 packages before they try to upgrade to > 1.7. I'm not sure that's true, though. It seems there are at least some > people that only update once every 3-5 years. :-)
So you'd rather have the apr1 package in the 1.7 release as well? Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to Cygwin Project Co-Leader cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Red Hat
