On Wed, Jan 23, 2002 at 11:23:57PM -0500, Jimmy Kaplowitz wrote: > Please CC me on all replies, even though I am (finally) subscribed. It > works better with my mail sorting setup. > > On Wed, Jan 23, 2002 at 09:00:14PM -0700, Joel Baker wrote: > > Having run into a few packages, now, which have dependancies on specific > > GNU libc versions (or rather, libc versions, when all that the packaging > > system understands is libc == GNU libc), which compiled just fine under > > the NetBSD libc, I come to the following conclusion: > > > > We should request that a provision be made for desginating which libc is > > required, from the developer/policy community. > > This is not true; GNU libc is called libc6 rather than libc. So there is > no conflict. Also, the source packages don't generally have dependencies > on libc6, only the compiled binary ones (as makes sense for dynamically > linked Linux executables).
And before that, it was called libc5. Every *other* package that has a number used in such fashion considers the main name to be <X>, and <X># is just a packaging convenience. Witness perl and perl5, perl5.6, etc. Or do you really thing people won't scream, if *we* call the NetBSD libc package just 'libc'? What about the FreeBSD port? (Note: *most* of the source packages don't, no; but a few do, such as gettext, the one which caused me to write the first email about this) > By the way, in response to your question, I at least am an official Debian > developer; are there any others on this project? (This is mainly a question > out of curiosity rather than anything else.) > > To all of you out there: > > By the way, I will be at the LinuxWorld Expo in New York City from Jan > 30 through Feb 1, in the Debian booth. Come by and maybe we can talk > about Debian GNU/NetBSD as well as Debian GNU/Linux! Stuck in Colorado, myself. So unless they hold one in Denver... > Also, I have made some progress regarding packaging useful programs such > as sudo (and getting it to work, of course), gettext, sharutils (with nls > disabled only), and libtool. I have been having problems getting fakeroot > working, but I will post about those separately. Most of the problems I have > been able to overcome, but I need a bit of advice on one of them. Consider > this my "hi, count me in!" post. *scratches head* gettext and libtool compiled without any apparent problems. Did I miss something? (and thus, do I need to pull the packages out of the APT binary area?) -- *************************************************************************** Joel Baker System Administrator - lightbearer.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://users.lightbearer.com/lucifer/
