Brian Nelson writes: > Christopher Martin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> On June 13, 2004 12:44, Brian Nelson wrote: >>> For one, they're missing the qaccessible.h header. It appears to >>> missing from the 3.2.3 packages as well. >> >> Martin, there seem to be a few other bugs open regarding missing >> files. qvfbhdr.h is missing - #182366. tabwidget.png should also >> allegedly exist >> - #195189. And someone raised a question over the location of >> # headers >> under /u/i/qt3, that I'm not qualified to answer fully, but thought >> I'd mention - please see #226990. There are yet more reports on >> missing headers, but these are the ones that are still relevant, >> from what I can tell.
> IMO, the reason for the missing files is the ridiculous number of > superfluous packages Qt has been split into. Is it really necessary > to have libqt3-mt-dev, libqt3-headers, libqt3-compat-headers, > qt3-dev-tools, qt3-designer, qt3-apps-dev, qt3-linguist, > qt3-assistant, qt3-qtconfig, qt3-dev-tools-embedded, > qt3-dev-tools-compat, etc. (I think I even left some out!) in > separate packages? Just a single -dev package seems sufficient to > me. > It makes me wonder what kind of a bribe it took to get this past the > ftp-masters. Are you sure you know what you're talking about ? I can think of a lot of situations in which those tools are used in various different combinations, so that it really is a good idea to have them in separate packages. cheers domi
