On Tue, Jun 05, 2007 at 08:14:18PM +0200, Mike Hommey wrote: > On Tue, Jun 05, 2007 at 02:02:59PM -0400, Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > [1] #363133 > > [2] Would it be worthwhile to support multiple symbols on one line to > > save even more space? > > symbol [symbol...] dependencies...
> It would be much more worth to drop the package name from the > dependencies. Except a few corner cases (which could probably be > worked around some other way), they are always the package name > inside which the library is... > The >= is also questionnable. Are there different relationships used > there ? Consider cases where you want to declare that more than one package satisfies the dependency -- we do have libraries using that today in their shlibs. I do think it's necessary here to support the full range of dependency semantics here. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
