At 17:52 Uhr -0500 29.01.2003, Alexander Hansen wrote:
No worries :-)On Wed, 2003-01-29 at 17:46, Max Horn wrote:At 17:12 Uhr -0500 29.01.2003, Alexander Hansen wrote: >A future issue for concern (after libpng vs. libpng3) is gtkhtml vs. >gtkhtml1.1 . A lot of the users have GNOME, and gnome-core-shlibs >depends on gtkhtml, as does gnucash (the two examples I actually have >installed). However, evolution-1.2 depends on gtkhtml1.1-shlibs . > >This leads to a failed update-all because gtkhtml can't be removed in >favor of gtkhtml-shlibs.Hu? both should coexist just fine, no?Sorry--caffeine in bloodstream failing. I meant gtkhtml can't be removed in favor of gtkhtml1.1
one of the problems is/was (didn't check if it is still the case) that gnome-core-shlibs depends on gtkhtml, which clearly is not necessary. We have to go over all packages and check this, I guess when gtkhtml was splitoffized the dependencies where just automatically updated and not reviewed later on. Masanori told me he can't cope with all the work, as many of his (gnome) packages are affected, so maybe some of us can help him there (Masanori, correct me if I misunderstood you there!).
Compiling a list of packages that depend on gtkhthml, sorted by maintainer, would be a good first step.
Cheers,
Max
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
_______________________________________________
Fink-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
