Does anyone have a response to Steve Langasek's query below? The history of the gdal package naming decision is here: http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-grass-general/2005-December/001462.html http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-grass-general/2005-December/001498.html http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-grass-general/2006-January/001611.html http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-grass-general/2006-January/001645.html
I believe the -dev package is renamed to deal with the possibility of an API change: http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-grass-general/2006-January/001622.html This seems consistent with the recommendations at http://www.netfort.gr.jp/~dancer/column/libpkg-guide/libpkg-guide.html#id271897 Steve On Sun, 2006-09-03 at 21:59 -0500, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Sat, Sep 02, 2006 at 11:29:50PM +0200, Laurent Bonnaud wrote: > > The source package cannot be rebuild, too: > > > # apt-get build-dep qgis > > Reading package lists... Done > > Building dependency tree... Done > > Package libgdal1-1.3.1-dev is not available, but is referred to by > > another package. > > This may mean that the package is missing, has been obsoleted, or > > is only available from another source > > However the following packages replace it: > > libgdal1-1.3.2-dev > > E: Package libgdal1-1.3.1-dev has no installation candidate > > E: Failed to satisfy Build-Depends dependency for qgis: > > libgdal1-1.3.1-dev > > Why does gdal need to repeatedly change the name of its -dev package? This > seems to unnecessarily prevent doing binNMUs of qgis on ABI update. > -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
