I acknowledge that a header only library is uncommon. But I can't agree that it us a bug. Thus I don't believe a warning is required. And I certainly won't remove the package for this reason.
Given that, can you restate what problem you encountered using the package? Thanks, Steve On October 21, 2015 5:50:43 PM GMT+05:30, Joachim Wuttke <j.wut...@fz-juelich.de> wrote: >Package: libgtest-dev >Version: 1.7.0-4 > >There exists no corresponding library binary package libgtest1. > >This is in accordance with a recommendation of the upstream authors, >https://code.google.com/p/googletest/wiki/FAQ#Why_is_it_not_recommended_to_install_a_pre-compiled_copy_of_Goog, >but it is in conflict with the well-established standard way >of how libraries are distributed in Debian. > >I wonder if there is any recommendable use of a header package >that comes without the corresponding library package. Unless >there is a convincing use case, I propose to remove libgtest-dev >for good. > >Otherwise, at the very least, I suggest that the description of >libgtest-dev be amended to clearly state that, quite exceptionally >for a header package, its dependence on the binary library is >not enforced in Debian, and that upon special recommendation of >upstream the binary library is not and will not be packaged for >Debian. > >--- > >Dr. Joachim Wuttke >Group Leader Scientific Computing >Jülich Centre for Neutron Science (JCNS) >Forschungszentrum Jülich GmbH >Outstation at Heinz Maier-Leibnitz Zentrum (MLZ) >+49 89 289 10715 >http://apps.jcns.fz-juelich.de -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
