From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Dirk Eddelbuettel" To: pfaffben@msu.edu, gsl-discuss@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: GNU Scientific Library (GSL) 0.8 is released Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 13:20:00 -0000 Message-id: X-SW-Source: 2001/msg00183.html > "Dirk Eddelbuettel" writes: > > > > Dirk Eddelbuettel writes: > > > > > * Packages for Debian GNU/Linux: libgsl0, libgsl0-dev, gsl-ref-psdoc > > > > > > > > Please add the actual links for these > > > > > > > > http://http.us.debian.org/debian/pool/main/g/gsl/ > > > > http://http.us.debian.org/debian/pool/main/g/gsl-ref-psdoc/ > > > > > > > > > > Ok, but shouldn't they install it using apt-get or dselect? > > > > Sure, that works as well, is generally speaking a lot easier and doesn't > > require the links. > > > > But there are situations where you just want to grab just the .orig.tar.gz, > > .dsc and .diff.gz to recompile them locally (e.g. when the build daemons > > That's what `apt-get source' is for. Again, "sure in general" but you cut & deleted a relevant other part of my previous prose: this doesn't cut the mustard if you follow an older release (say, potato) and you deb-src points to that too. Also, I prefer not have deb-src entries in sources.conf as this slows "apt-get update" down. All these reasons are fine and valid, but could someone please tell me (in private as this is getting way off-topic for the list) exactly what harm is caused by adding these links? -- According to the latest figures, 43% of all signatures are totally worthless.