Why "tcl-snack | tcl-snack-alsa" is bad for you? On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 2:38 PM, Giulio Paci <[email protected]> wrote: > Now that libsnack2 has been renamed to tcl-snack and that libsnack2-alsa has > been renamed to tcl-snack-alsa, the situation seems even worse. > > Is there any way a package using snack can depend on a generic version of > snack, without listing all possible backends? (i.e., depend on a generic > version that other > backends also provide?) > > Bests, > Giulio.
-- Sergei Golovan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
