Subject: Re: tcl split
To: None <email@example.com>
From: Bjoern Labitzke <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 01/10/2000 21:23:02
* Hubert Feyrer (email@example.com) [000110 18:57]:
| On Mon, 10 Jan 2000, Matthias Drochner wrote:
| > And if we don't allow coexistence: Why do we go through all this
| > trouble with include/tcl8.0/ et al. version dependant subdirs, which
| > breaks almost every automatic configuration script - for nothing?
| History reasons? Really, I don't know.
Perhaps Alistair can speak up here? I guess he did the initial import of the
package from a FreeBSD port. Perhaps he just copied and adjusted it without
much thought, too?
I would suggest: Use tcl und tk as the package names and keep tcl80 and tk80
until the references from the depending packages are gone. I will do that for
some packages (at least those I use and where I am able to see problems) and
might try for some others that seem easy to fix. But as I said before the
fixes from me will have to wait some time. But I guess it will not hurt to
have tcl and tk besides the tcl80/tk80 packages for some time, will it?
BTW: Thanks to Hubert and the rest who worked on Packages.txt. I could learn
something about writing packages when I finally looked into that file ;-)
Bjoern Labitzke <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Use PGP! (Don't you use envelopes for your letters?)