Re: Comments regarding gdal_1.10.0-0~exp1_i386.changes

2013-06-25 Thread Francesco P. Lovergine
On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 06:24:16AM +, Ansgar Burchardt wrote: > Hi, > > why does libgdal1h provide libgdal1? If it is binary compatible why was the > package name changed? If it is not binary compatible it shouldn't claim > otherwise. > Indeed it is not due to dropped tiff/geotiff functions.

Comments regarding gdal_1.10.0-0~exp1_i386.changes

2013-06-24 Thread Ansgar Burchardt
Hi, why does libgdal1h provide libgdal1? If it is binary compatible why was the package name changed? If it is not binary compatible it shouldn't claim otherwise. Ansgar ___ Pkg-grass-devel mailing list Pkg-grass-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://