Anthony Towns <aj@azure.humbug.org.au> writes:
> Frank Küster wrote:
>
> > Do I understand right that you recommend not to use libfoo1-dev,
> > libfoo2-dev generally, but that the most recent version should be just
> > libfoo-dev? The Debian library packaging guide gives the opposite
> > advice, to use libfoo<number>-dev always, but I have learned that this
> > document does not represent a consensus, anyway.
>
> If you need libfoo-dev 1 and libfoo-dev 2 installed simultaneously on
> user's machines, you need different package names. That's desirable
> very rarely and usually entirely undesirable -- it wastes disk space,
> forces people to edit build-depends and potentially makefiles, and
> generally ends up just being confusing.
But the advice in the library packaging guide is to do something like
Package: libpackage2-dev
Provides: libpackage-dev
Conflicts: libpackage-dev
which means that only one of the -dev packages can be installed on any
one system.
AFAICT the above approach offers nothing more than simply
Package: libpackage-dev
would do. Right?
--
Jens Peter Secher
_DD6A 05B0 174E BFB2 D4D9 B52E 0EE5 978A FE63 E8A1 jpsecher get2net dk_
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
