On Thu, Jan 21, 1999 at 05:33:32PM -0700, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > I guess, logically, a -dev package for a libc6 library should depend on > libc6-dev and a -dev package for a libc5 library should depend on > libc5-dev, source packages should depend on libc-dev as it hopefully > irrelevent which version :>
I haven't been following debian-* very closely lately so I missed the start of this thread and don't know the exact problem being addressed. However, since I started the -dev package convention way back when I was maintaining libc, perhaps I can add some clarification. The intent for a libfooABC-dev package was to depend on the most explicit name for any other -dev packages it needs, e.g. libbarXYZ-dev. The more generically named libfoo-dev virtual package was only intended to prevent installation of another version of the same -dev package or another conflicting -dev package. The reason libc5-altdev didn't provide libc-dev is because it was installed in a non-standard location so it couldn't conflict with any other libcX-dev. Take a look at my tcl7.6-dev, tcl8.0-dev, tk4.2-dev and tk8.0-dev packages to see how this is done in a real world situation. The dependencies and conflicts are setup to prevent nonsensical installations such as tcl7.6-dev with tk8.0-dev or tcl8.0-dev with tk4.2-dev. David -- David Engel [EMAIL PROTECTED]
