On Sun, Dec 10, 2000 at 02:54:35PM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Hi,
> >>"Julian" == Julian Gilbey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Julian> We should have a c++-compiler virtual package to match the c-compiler
> Julian> package. At present, at least in potato, only g++ Provides this
> Julian> virtual package, but there may be others. And policy should encode
> Julian> current practice.
>
> Isn't current practice not creating virtual packages until we
> actually needs them? I can come up with hordes of potentially useful
> virtual packages (actually, several per real package with a little
> bit of effort). In the past, we have only created virtual packages
> when there really were alternate ``concrete'' packages that could
> provide the virtual package.
Yes, except that the g++ package already provides c++-compiler. So I
guess we should instead submit a bug against g++, at least for the
time being.
What do you think of this?
Julian
--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Julian Gilbey, Dept of Maths, QMW, Univ. of London. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Debian GNU/Linux Developer, see http://www.debian.org/~jdg
Donate free food to the world's hungry: see http://www.thehungersite.com/
