On Thu, 5 Sep 1996, Guy Maor wrote: > > [very helpful description of dependencies deleted] > I agree with Ian's definition.
me to. :-) > The alternative is unpleasant - a multitude of tiny packages. nevertheless dpkg should be divided into two binary packages: dpkg (which is the most esential base package of all :-), and dpkg-source, which only the developers will want to have. this way the dependencies (while different) could eventually become simpler? jjm -- Juergen Menden | Disclaimer: The opinions expressed by me, tel: +49 (89) 289 - 22387 +-----------+ are (usually) not the opinions e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | of anyone else on this planet. Hi! I'm a .signature virus! Add me to your .signature and join in the fun!
