On Fri, Nov 28, 2003 at 05:11:13PM +0100, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> > Enforce exact versioned dependencies of -dev library packages on their
> > shared counterparts, per Debian Policy section 8.5.
>
> [...]
>
> > @@ -1083,7 +1083,7 @@
> > Package: xlibmesa-gl-dev
> > Section: libdevel
> > Architecture: any
> > -Depends: xlibmesa-gl, xlibs-dev, libc6-dev | libc-dev
> > +Depends: xlibmesa-gl (= ${Source-Version}), xlibs-dev, libc6-dev | libc-dev
> > Conflicts: libgl-dev, libutahglx-dev, xlibmesa-dev (<< 4.2.1-5)
> > Provides: libgl-dev
> > Replaces: libgl-dev, libutahglx-dev, xlibmesa-dev (<< 4.2.1-5)
>
> Is this really necessary? It means libgl1 packages built from DRI CVS
> will no longer be able to satisfy this dependency.Can you spell out the problem a little more clearly for me? Why is it *desirable* for libgl1 packages built from DRI CVS to satisfy this dependency? > And I can't build libgl-dev packages from there either because GLw is > missing Do you know why it is missing? > (BTW, is GLw_pic supposed to be in xlibs-static-pic?). I hadn't thought about it. -- G. Branden Robinson | Of two competing theories or Debian GNU/Linux | explanations, all other things [EMAIL PROTECTED] | being equal, the simpler one is to http://people.debian.org/~branden/ | be preferred. -- Occam's Razor
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
