Hi Peter. If I understand correctly, any package which links to dlcompat will build differently under 10.2 and 10.3, regardless of what dependencies are specified. Both dlcompat and dlcompat-dev are placeholders in 10.3, are they not?
So, since the package in question was already in 10.3, anyone who built it in 10.3 was already getting the system dlcompat instead of the old fink one. It doesn't matter whether there was a BuildDepends specified or not. The important point, which all of us should keep in mind, is that a package built on 10.2 is not binary-equivalent to the package with the same version/ revision numbers built on 10.3. We couldn't figure a good way of indicating those distinctions in revision numbers, so we decided that the tree is part of the data. And we are enforcing this distinction through dpkg by the virtual depenedency on the darwin version, which is now always present. If the package in question had stated an explicit Depends on dlcompat-shlibs, then the revision number would need to be changed. But otherwise, I contend that it is being built in the same way as before the change. -- Dave ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email sponsored by: ApacheCon 2003, 16-19 November in Las Vegas. Learn firsthand the latest developments in Apache, PHP, Perl, XML, Java, MySQL, WebDAV, and more! http://www.apachecon.com/ _______________________________________________ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
