I fully agree with this, it hurts on one to have them but helps us
developpers in the mean time.

[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>Someday, later, we will want to introduce Shlibs and start to use it.
>If we are sure that this will be the name of the field, it would be nice
>to have "fink validate" not object to it.  (Causes less confusion when we
>actually start to use it.)  We don't make point releases of the fink
>package manager very often, so I thought it would be good to include this
>field now for future use (like we did with the BuildDependsOnly field).

.^`.,][JFH][`.,.][JFH][.^`.,
  Justin F. Hallett - Systems Analyst               
          Phone: (780)-408-3094
            Fax: (780)-454-3200
        E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 .^`.,][JFH][`.,.][JFH][.^`.,


_______________________________________________
Fink-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel

Reply via email to