On 02 Sep 2002 16:48:05 +0200
I've added the build-dep, but I don't get a versioned binary depend.
Hmm. Come to think of it, why doesn't libd-i have the SONAME in the
package name?
Yes, this is a very badly packaged shared library.
regards,
junichi
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, Sep 03, 2002 at 09:47:22PM +0900, Junichi Uekawa wrote:
On 02 Sep 2002 16:48:05 +0200
I've added the build-dep, but I don't get a versioned binary depend.
Hmm. Come to think of it, why doesn't libd-i have the SONAME in the
package name?
Yes, this is a very badly
I'm getting ready to commit my changes that make anna and main-menu
share Packages-file parsing code. They do so by a function in libd-i.
This means that if you want to build anna or main-menu after I've
committed, you first have to build and install the new libd-i, which is
still unreleased.
On 02 Sep 2002 09:56:11 +0200
I'm getting ready to commit my changes that make anna and main-menu
share Packages-file parsing code. They do so by a function in libd-i.
This means that if you want to build anna or main-menu after I've
committed, you first have to build and install the new
mån 2002-09-02 klockan 13.16 skrev Junichi Uekawa:
Should I let anna and main-menu build-depend on libdebian-installer-dev
(= 0.04) so you'll be forced to rebuild libd-i first? Is that enough,
or should I add an explicit binary dependency on libdebian-installer (=
0.04) too?
Yes, both
5 matches
Mail list logo