On 2 Aug 2002, Craige McWhirter wrote:

> On Fri, 2002-08-02 at 15:29, James Gregory wrote:
>
> > you'll notice that debian has a similar convention (though just looking
> > through "apt-cache search freetype" on our token debian computer here seems
> > to show a slightly counter-intuitive variant in this case)
>
> G'day James, I followed your example to see what was counter-intuitive
> but as "apt-cache search freetype" doesn't show the version number I ran
> a different command (there is no "freetype" package in the current
> Debian system), shown below, the output of which seemed quite clear to
> me, so I genuinely would like to know what was counter-intuitive.

Sure.

The command I ran was this (well, this one will highlight the problem):

$ apt-cache search freetype | egrep 'freetype|ttf'
freetype-tools - Bundled tests, demos and tools for FreeType
freetype1 - The FREE TrueType Font Engine, shared library files (old).
freetype1-dev - FreeType development files (static library and headers)
(old)
freetype2-dev - FreeType development files (static library and headers).
clanlib2-ttf - TTF module for ClanLib game SDK
freetype1-tools - Bundled tests, demos and tools for FreeType 1
freetype2 - Dummy package for transition to libttf2.
freetype2-demos - FreeType 2 demonstration programs.
gimp-freetype - text plug-in for GIMP based on freetype
libfreetype6 - FreeType 2 font engine, shared library files.
libfreetype6-dev - FreeType 2 font engine, development files
libttf-dev - FreeType 1 development files (static library and headers).
libttf2 - FreeType 1, The FREE TrueType Font Engine, shared library files.
ttf2pt1 - A TrueType to PostScript Type 1 Font Converter

freetype2 was the package I'd have expected to store freetype2, but it says
that that's a dummy wrapper around libttf2. libttf2 is apparently freetype
1. So, if I understand dependency resolution correctly, doing apt-get
install freetype2 would actually result in freetype1 being installed. There
is libfreetype6 there, which I suspect has what I would have expected in
freetype2, and I understand that apt-get would probably find it somewhere in
the resolution, but I found it a little counter-intuitive was all. I expect
the package that holds freetype2 to be called freetype2.

But I concede that it's probably a cultual thing. I'm sure that the naming
scheme is perfectly sensible if you happen to like the debian way of doing
things.

So sorry, I should have qualified that with *I* find it counter-intuitive.

James.


-- 
SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group - http://slug.org.au/
More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug

Reply via email to