| 1 |
* Luca Barbato <lu_zero@g.o> schrieb: |
| 2 |
> Enrico Weigelt wrote: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> > |
| 5 |
> > It mixes up diffent things to one and just introduces new |
| 6 |
> > problems instead of solving anything. I could live with that, |
| 7 |
> > if it's for supporting different ABIs, but it obviously isn't. |
| 8 |
> > |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> No? |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
In this case not - it's used to mix up two different packages. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
<snip> |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
> > gtk1 and gtk2 are completely different packages, they're not |
| 17 |
> > compatible. So why should they be one package ? Just because |
| 18 |
> > they share some ideas and the name ?! |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> Because gtk-2.xx is originated from gtk+-1.2.xx and you still |
| 21 |
> have a common set of widget API ? |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
The APIs are incompatible. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
> > For example, there are lots of packages requiring gtk1, other |
| 26 |
> > gtk2. As long as dependencies don't cope the slot cleanly, |
| 27 |
> > slotting is utterly useless. |
| 28 |
> |
| 29 |
> gtk-1 is deprecated, it will disappear sooner or later. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
Maybe, maybe not. That will take some time until all packages are |
| 32 |
rewritten from gtk1 to gtk2. |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
BTW: an "problem will go away by itself sooner or later" isn't |
| 35 |
actually an good argumentation for such kind of problems. |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
cu |
| 39 |
-- |
| 40 |
--------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| 41 |
Enrico Weigelt == metux IT service - http://www.metux.de/ |
| 42 |
--------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| 43 |
Please visit the OpenSource QM Taskforce: |
| 44 |
http://wiki.metux.de/public/OpenSource_QM_Taskforce |
| 45 |
Patches / Fixes for a lot dozens of packages in dozens of versions: |
| 46 |
http://patches.metux.de/ |
| 47 |
--------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| 48 |
-- |
| 49 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives