On Thu, Jun 03, 1999 at 04:43:57PM -0500, Steve Greenland wrote: > That's all it has to provide, because that is the functionality that > xlib6g provides. The (presumed) point of separating xlib6g from > xfree86-common is that xfree86-common is not platform specific. If > Branden merged the packages, would you be happy? (Branden, I'm not > suggesting you do so.) xfree86-common provides stuff that should be present on a machine with the X libraries installed, OR with an X server installed. There is stuff in xlib6g that is not platform-specific, like the XKB, NLS, and locale data. Santiago is upset because he is forced to install stuff that has to do with X on his console-only machine. What he's actually unhappy with is the long-standing policy that Debian packages that CAN be configured with X support MUST be configured with X support. As I said before, an xlib6g-dummy package would probably address what is actually peeving him (and it would make some other people happy as well), but I don't think it would stop him from complaining about how I have handled the XFree86 packages. -- G. Branden Robinson | Any man who does not realize that he is Debian GNU/Linux | half an animal is only half a man. branden@ecn.purdue.edu | -- Thornton Wilder cartoon.ecn.purdue.edu/~branden/ |
Attachment:
pgpoNPXehSTsb.pgp
Description: PGP signature