Libsoundtouch{0,1}-dev?

[Jonas Smedegaard]

On Wed, Feb 02, 2011 at 04:10:51PM +0100, Benjamin Drung wrote:
>Am Mittwoch, den 02.02.2011, 15:23 +0100 schrieb Adrian Knoth:
>> On Wed, Feb 02, 2011 at 02:54:37PM +0100, David Henningsson wrote:
>>
>> > Ardour (perhaps among others) build-depends on libsoundtouch1-dev, 
>> > but this is not built by the archive as soundtouch provides 
>> > libsoundtouch-dev but not libsoundtouch1-dev. Is this just a typo 
>> > in soundtouch packaging, or do we have a more serious problem?
>>
>> The changelog in
>>
>> http://packages.qa.debian.org/s/soundtouch/news/20110116T154758Z.html
>>
>> says:
>>
>>    * Rename libsoundtouch1c2 to libsoundtouch0 and libsoundtouch1-dev to
>>      libsoundtouch0-dev so we comply with policy.
>>      - Obsolete c2 naming due to CXX transition is not needed anymore.
>>      - ardour used to provide libsoundtouch0 and libsoundtouch0-dev as
>>        mentioned
>>        in #271108. These packages were removed in 2004.
>>
>> So looks like a "transition" to me, and we probably need to readjust
>> ardour's build dependency (to libsoundtouch-dev). I can take care of
>> this if agreed upon.
>
>It's libsoundtouch0-dev. The question is: Why doesn't libsoundtouch-dev 
>exist?

Virtual unversioned -dev package names providing a corresponding 
versioned package is an optional convenience feature, not mandated.  
Also, it makes sense to use directly only if a single real package 
satisfies that virtual dependency at each distro suite.


  - Jonas

-- 
  * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
  * Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/

  [x] quote me freely  [ ] ask before reusing  [ ] keep private
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-multimedia-maintainers/attachments/20110202/5e20607f/attachment.pgp>