* Junichi Uekawa ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > I'd like to propose, for new -dev packages, to > name -dev packages after their runtime library counterparts.
Uh, no? The -dev packages have no need to match to a specific runtime
library and this just creates unnecessary work.
> This allows mechanically determining shared library
> package and corresponding -dev package.
Eh? How about you go a bit deeper into why that's necessary and how
that's not possible today? What problem are you trying to solve with
this?
> This was raised in the Shared library BOF @ Debconf5
> which was held this morning.
Clearly something's missing here 'cause you havn't provided any rational
for why this would be a good thing and honestly it certainly looks like
a bad thing(tm) to do to me.
Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
