From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 25044 invoked by alias); 1 Sep 2008 06:16:30 -0000 Received: (qmail 25033 invoked by uid 22791); 1 Sep 2008 06:16:29 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from vms044pub.verizon.net (HELO vms044pub.verizon.net) (206.46.252.44) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Mon, 01 Sep 2008 06:15:51 +0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] ([71.112.1.127]) by vms044.mailsrvcs.net (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-6.01 (built Apr 3 2006)) with ESMTPA id <0K6I006596OIT432@vms044.mailsrvcs.net> for cygwin-apps@cygwin.com; Mon, 01 Sep 2008 01:15:39 -0500 (CDT) Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2008 06:16:00 -0000 From: David Rothenberger Subject: Re: [ITA] apr1-1.3.3-1 In-reply-to: <48BB5BF2.58912D21@dessent.net> To: cygwin-apps@cygwin.com Message-id: <48BB8851.3000302@acm.org> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit References: <48BB5217.4010809@acm.org> <48BB5BF2.58912D21@dessent.net> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.1.16) Gecko/20080708 Thunderbird/2.0.0.16 Mnenhy/0.7.5.666 X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact cygwin-apps-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk Sender: cygwin-apps-owner@cygwin.com List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Mail-Followup-To: cygwin-apps@cygwin.com X-SW-Source: 2008-09/txt/msg00003.txt.bz2 On 8/31/2008 8:05 PM, Brian Dessent wrote: > David Rothenberger wrote: > >> I've changed the package structure as follows: >> ~ * libapr1: Runtime library and documentation. >> ~ * libapr1-devel: Development headers and libraries. >> ~ * apr1: Source package. > > Something seems wrong here. [snip] > > Okay, so you want to rename apr1 to apr1-devel, that makes some sense. > But why does apr1 continue to contain just the source? Why not just > have apr1-devel contain the source and make apr1 a completely empty > package? Okay. I'll rebuild with apr1 being an empty transition package and libapr1 containing the source. > Does this also mean that you will take over these as well: > > @ aprutil1 > @ libaprutil1 Yes, I'm working on those as well. > Also, there are these four old ABI=0 packages to deal with: > > @ apr > @ libapr0 > @ apr-util > @ libaprutil0 > > I can't find anything in current setup.ini that actually requires these > ABI=0 versions (other than themselves) so can't we just delete the above > four outright? I guess so. > Or, how about the following idea: repurpose the the package named "apr" > (which was previously the ABI=0 one) to be the main documentation and > source package for the current ABI=1 I don't see any reason to put the documentation in a separate package, so I'm going to go with libapr1: runtime and documentation, source libapr1-devel: development -- David Rothenberger ---- daveroth@acm.org XIIdigitation, n.: The practice of trying to determine the year a movie was made by deciphering the Roman numerals at the end of the credits. -- Rich Hall, "Sniglets"