> Uhm... why not just make the header packages (e.g. orbit) depend on the
> binary package (orbit-bin), which would immediatly solve all the
> strange problems, and in fact might be required anyway in many cases
> (e.g. many unix libs requrie their foo-config apps to be useful for
> developmen
At 22:29 Uhr -0500 24.02.2002, David R. Morrison wrote:
[... snipped explanation of why shlibs are good ...]
David, I think you are preaching to the choir here. Martin didn't
argue against the shlibs stuff here, just against the -bin stuff
(which I don't like much myself, but oh well). No need
Hi Martin. I'm sorry that the backward-compatibility has not been
perfect. But let me remind you about what we are solving with the
splitting up of packages.
An excellent example is provided by gal. gal is under rapid development,
and new versions (gal-17, gal-18, gal-19) are *not* backward-
OK, at least one of the recent mysteries of mine is solved:
control-center rebuilds now again for me.
The problem was that orbit-bin was not installed. The reason is clear:
nothing depends on it. So its contents that were in the orbit package
before are removed. No backward compatibility.
Now I
