Hi Sam! I moved the discussion about the linking sets to bug #177057 [4] where it belongs to, please continue there (again, no subscription required).
I also cc:ed the original submitter for that bug and the one for bug #462085 [5], since I consider the second a duplicate of the first. If Jörg Sommer will not disagree in one week, I will merge the two bugs. On Wed, 05 Nov 2008 04:44:24 +0100, Sam Steingold wrote: >> * Luca Capello <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-11-05 00:01:59 +0100]: >>> readline-dev x11-dev et al are required only for building images on >>> top of the full linking set, not on top of the base linking set, so >>> they are at most "strongly recommended". >> >> The problem is double: >> >> 1) ATM Debian does not ship two clisp linking sets, despite a wishlist >> bug is openend for more than 5 years now [4] (with another one being >> very similar [5]). I already planned to solve this issue splitting >> the Debian clisp package into clisp-base and clisp-full, but I have >> not had time yet :-( >> >> 2) makevars wants to include all of the libraries listed in clisp-dev >> Depends:, that is why these libraries are, in the Debian world, >> required. > > why don't you want to ship one package with two linking sets?! I am fine with one package with two linking sets, but having two separate packages is IMHO a better solution, since it will help people who wants a minimal clisp installation. Is there any disadvantage with two separate packages? What do the original submitters think? Thx, bye, Gismo / Luca >> Footnotes: >> [4] http://bugs.debian.org/177057 >> [5] http://bugs.debian.org/462085
pgpUB29RGj1Nk.pgp
Description: PGP signature
