On Fri, Dec 12, 1997 at 03:19:29PM -0500, Chris Fearnley wrote: > Why should libc5 conflict with libc5-dev??
It doesn't need to. The explicit version dependency in libc5-dev is sufficient. > Would this scheme improve things: > > libc5 (stable,unstable): No conflicts, no depends (pre-depends on > ldso, of course) > > libc5-altdev: Conflicts: libc5-dev Doesn't need to. It doesn't make any sense to do so, but there is no reason libc5-dev and libc5-altdev can't both be installed. > libc6: Conflicts: (libc5<<5.4.33-6) > (Necessary due to utmp issue -- Hell, someone upgrading from a CD > with stock 1.3.1 will be able to corrupt utmp in the current scheme > anyway!) I can add this in the next release (due very soon) so let me know ASAP. > libc6-dev: Conflicts: libc5-dev > (libc6 development conflicts with libc5-dev -- need altdev) Doesn't need to. Both provide and conflict with the virtual libc-dev package for just this situation. > BTW, who is maintaining libc5, libc6? Helmut Geyer is listed but I > remember seeing that he has vanished?? Nobody is maintaining libc5. Volunteers have been asked for but no one has stepped forward. David -- David Engel ODS Networks [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1001 E. Arapaho Road (972) 234-6400 Richardson, TX 75081 -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
