On Sun, 12 Feb 2006 00:56:22 -0800, Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Are there really differences in the new version that warrant forcing > sourceful changes in all of the reverse-dependencies? If not, I'm > inclined to NMU gnustep-base and gnustep-gui to Provide: the old names > of these -dev packages and schedule binNMUs for the affected packages, > so that this gnustep transition doesn't continue to drag on. Err. Sorry, I should have caught this at first. For most (for some value of "most") packages, a binNMU is not enough. Due to the changed file locations, most packages would need their debian/rules modified to add "gsdh_gnustep" in the binary-* targets. Otherwise, they may not be installable (if they have any files in the relocated directories). AFAICT, though, most applications should be alright (though they should probably add gsdh_gnustep anyways, in case they later include files in the relocated directories). -- Hubert Chan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - http://www.uhoreg.ca/ PGP/GnuPG key: 1024D/124B61FA Fingerprint: 96C5 012F 5F74 A5F7 1FF7 5291 AF29 C719 124B 61FA Key available at wwwkeys.pgp.net. Encrypted e-mail preferred. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
