On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 03:45:01PM +0100, David Paleino wrote:
> It's a 2.3, at least from what agg/copying says.
> > Seriously someone should consider an AGG fork from 2.4
> > which is something maybe mapserver folks already did.
> Francesco, do you know if such a fork has been officially announced, with
> proper releases and such?
> It might make sense to provide a separate package (but this is surely
> post-Squeeze) to link against. So that we don't need N copies of libagg spread
> around the archive.

Current committers are simply working on the 2.4 tree, due to obvious
license concerns. You can simply check 
and consult the mailing list to check. Maxim has simply lost interest
and current working happens onto a specific 2.4 branch. I wonder if
maintaining 2.5 in Debian makes sense. Also notes that agg is
essentially a template library, so distributing shlibs
is a non-sense, because instances are defined by use.
That's the reason to have a -dev package only. There's nothing like
a 'system wide' library in proper sense.

Francesco P. Lovergine

Pkg-grass-devel mailing list

Reply via email to