On 7 May 2013 08:19, Paul Gevers <elb...@debian.org> wrote: > Can you please document that, I mean which ones? It would be great if > you would reply to the e-mail I sent yesterday to the release team with > full details, so that the team knows when they make a decision.
When I get home tonight I will compose an email to release team from my testing notes. > And I > think (unsure now) that these missing dependencies are actual bugs in > those packages, so they should get filed and fixed anyway. > Yes, I believe these are bugs in those packages that were hidden because lesstif2-dev depends on just about every libX*-dev package. > Did you actually try to > RUN any of the compiled packages? > Yes, although not being familiar with the packages, many of them I just ran and saw that a GUI appeared without any error messages. > If a user was developing with lesstif2-dev it would be removed due to > > the conflict above, but they would not have been able to continue > > building against libmotif-dev without making changes anyway. > > Why not? Aren't the headers the same? If not, how can WE replace > lesstif2 with libmotif? They would at least need to change the build-depends in debian/control, so it's still a manual change that needs to be made. > Anyway, the users that build are not the only > ones we need to care about. Surely only users that build lesstif packages would have lesstif2-dev installed? I'm not totally against a lesstif2-dev transitional package, I just want to be clear on why it is necessary.
