On Saturday 31 May 2003 13:54, Ralf S. Engelschall wrote: > > The reason to me seems that you don't > > provide a lot of fancy named links to libdb.a. > > That's correct. But IMHO those "fancy" names are nasty and I think we > should not play this game in OpenPKG, because it introduces mud into the > package. Instead, fixing or tweaking those packages which are unable to > find a straight-forward libdb.a should be fixed by us.
well it seems the majority feels OK about having this links I agree that this is not a 100% good indication though. > In OpenPKG we went the hard way and fixed > many packages so they work with the latest Berkeley-DB 4.1 Hmm I think I would prefer having the links over patching configure scripts of all dependend packages on a regular basis - because patching configure scripts is what I regard as "nasty". I would prefer to create the environment to have internet sources built almost unmodified. Sorry I don't follow you here. But it's your show. Choose your poison. ______________________________________________________________________ The OpenPKG Project www.openpkg.org Developer Communication List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
