On Sat, Feb 28, 2004 at 11:29:40PM -0500, Dave Vasilevsky wrote: > >>The packages for lame and atk1 do not follow shlibs policy. They have > >>both userland run-time programs and compile-time headers and .dylib > >>links in %N which is BDOnly. > > I have a fixed version of lame that I have been using privately for the > past while. I sent it to Sylvain, either he's too busy or my email > didn't get through. Should I simply commit this to CVS?
Whoops, I see you did attach a new .info for lame... SplitOff: << Package: %N-shlibs Replaces: %N << SplitOff2: << Package: %N-dev Replaces: %N (<= 3.93.1-10) << Should SplitOff:Replaces:%N also have versioning? Otherwise it doesn't make much sense. dan -- Daniel Macks [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.netspace.org/~dmacks ------------------------------------------------------- SF.Net is sponsored by: Speed Start Your Linux Apps Now. Build and deploy apps & Web services for Linux with a free DVD software kit from IBM. Click Now! http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1356&alloc_id=3438&op=click _______________________________________________ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
