Simon McVittie wrote: >As far as I can see, changing from (libtiffN-dev Provides libtiff-dev, >libtiff(N+1)-dev does not) to the other way round has an inherent race
Hm indeed. Makes me wonder whether it would not be better to make libtiff-dev the real package and abandon libtiffN-dev altogether. (Never understood why the -dev packages need the numbers, anyway.) On the other hand, that would mean that the transition starts as soon as the source package building libtiff(N+1) brings with it its own version of libtiff-dev⦠needs more careful uploads. bye, //mirabilos -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/l7slog$ege$1...@ger.gmane.org
