On Sun, Sep 11, 2005 at 12:43:48PM -0700, Ben Pfaff wrote: > > If the existing macros were replaced, then this would have the > negative effect that any program that does require Xt would now > successfully configure even though it would fail to compile or > link. It would also be a confusing divergence from upstream. I > am not in favor of this solution.
I'd rather have this fixed upstream that have this as a Debian specific fix. Having this just fixed in Debian really is of no use. And asking the Debian maintainer of the packages is the obvious choise for me to get this to upstream. > In the end, though, I'm not convinced that this problem really > needs a solution. Why is it so bad to add "libxt-dev" to > Build-Depends? Package are migrating from build depending on xlibs-dev that pulls in all xlibs, to only depending on things they need. And they always have to add libxt-dev even when they don't use it. Kurt -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
