On Sun, 6 Jul 2008 21:10:30 -0400
Graham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is there really no way to make libglide2 a "soft" dependency?
I do agree with your general complaint here, but unfortunately there is no
why to disable only the builtin part of glide, it's either all the
builtins or none.
On t
If I may chime in here...
It seems kind of wrong for libggi2 to depend on libglide2.
libggi2 is presumably needed by a lot of people, as it is a dependency
of mplayer and some other packages.
libglide2 is most likely needed by very few people nowadays: the
package description says that it only s
On Sun, 22 Jun 2008 16:18:14 +0300
Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> A tool is never a replacement for a brain. ;-)
>
> I do not doubt that the library has a dependency on libglide.
>
> But why is display-glide not only in an extra package but also built
> into the library?
>
> Especia
> PROTECTED]> by
> replying to this email.
>
>
> --
> 487142: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=487142
> Debian Bug Tracking System
> Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] with problems
> Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2008 13:56:28 +0100
> From: Bradley Smith <[EMAIL P
Package: libggi2
Version: 1:2.2.2-1
Severity: normal
Considering that there's an extra libggi-target-glide it's strange
that the latest libggi2 got an additional dependency on libglide2.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PRO
5 matches
Mail list logo
