On Thu, May 22, 2003 at 09:07:59PM +1000, Daniel Stone wrote: > On Thu, May 22, 2003 at 12:20:24PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote: > > On Thu, May 22, 2003 at 08:07:24PM +1000, Daniel Stone wrote: > > > On Thu, May 22, 2003 at 11:19:32AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote: > > > > your packages don't include xlibs-pic, which make libxosd-dev and > > > > libxosd2 > > > > uninstallable. I am not entirely sure why the libxosd packages depend on > > > > xlibs-pic and not xlibs, so it could simply be problem during the build > > > > of it. > > > > > > All the static libraries in my build of XFree86 are built -fPIC, whereas > > > they aren't by default in 4.2.1 - hence xlibs-pic. xlibs-pic went away > > > in 4.3.0; if you want to use libxosd2, I suggest recompiling it against > > > 4.3.0. > > > > Ok, i suppose a bug should be filled against libxosd once 4.3.0 reach > > the archive, so that it will get rebuilt. > > Yeah. > > > > Nothing I can do. And no, I'm not going to make an xlibs-pic package, > > > virtual or otherwise. > > > > Why ? Would the proper solution not be for xlibs to provide xlibs-pic ? > > Because xlibs-pic is a deprecated package name, and I don't want to > encourage use of it. While we're bumping versions from 4.2 to 4.3 > anyway, might as well try to get people to make this jump. xlibs-pic is > a nasty hack, and the sooner it dies, the better. I'm not going to aid > its survival.
Ok, that makes sense. BTW, some time back i asked for the addition of a xfree86-driver-sdk package so that driver packages could be easily built from xfree86 cvs. At that time you told me it would not be included in 4.3.0-1, but maybe a later version. Is this still of actuality ? I have played a bit with the SDK thingy, and i think the best way to handle this is to create a sdk tarball that other packages can then uncompress if needed. Does this make sense, or do you (and Branden) prefer another solution. Friendly, Sven Luther
