Michael Alan Dorman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Personally, I think it's smarter to keep the development package > unversioned. I have what I think is a technical argument: libjpeg. > > libjpeg has used a versioned -dev, and look at a lot of the problems > we've had with libjpeg, where months after the old packages were > updated to new versions with new sonames---meaning theoretically that > stuff shouldn't be compiled with them---we'd still get packages with > deps on them, because the -dev package's versioning prevented the > "correct" version from getting installed automatically. > > I just saw this on a new package on the alpha the other day---someone > had an older version of a versioned -dev package installed, and thus > we got a binary compiled against a less-than-latest version of a > library. > > I really think it's a bad idea to have versioned -dev packages. Have > we really had instances where they have given us any real advantage?
libgtk1.0-dev and libgtk1.2-dev are not source compatible. -- I consume, therefore I am
