Hi Laszlo, > > [...] why don't you just > > make libneon26-dev depend on either libneon26 or libneon26-gnutls? So one > > could easily migrate the > > neon-fired applications with automagically adapted binary dependencies to > > GnuTLS by recompiling them > > against a libneon26-dev depending on libneon26-gnutls. > But what would choose libneon26 or libneon26-gnutls during the > compilation phase? The buildds only know that the build dependency is > libneon26-dev and blindly choose the first alternative dependent > package, libneon26 this time. So everything would be linked with the > OpenSSL version of neon which is just wrong. Yeah, but that way I could build packages with GnuTLS-support by just rebuilding the packages and using the libneon26-gnutls on my system. The other way would be to alter the debian/control file myself.
On the other hand, if one picks GnuTLS for secure sockets with neon, one actually doesn't even have the chance to get a system with it, since libneon26 with OpenSSL- and with GnuTLS-support conflict each other, unless the control-files of all the installed packages are altered and rebuilt. When libneon26-dev would be modified to depend on either libneon26 or libneon26-gnutls, this would be reduced to a simple rebuild without altering the control files. > Regards, > Laszlo/GCS lg Erik -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
