Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2017 20:39:02 +0000
From: =?iso-8859-1?B?Q+Fn?= <ca6c@bitmessage.ch>
To: alpine-aports@lists.alpinelinux.org
Subject: Re: [alpine-aports] Older versions
Message-ID: <20171116203902.GA15424@alpine.my.domain>
References: <CAM2xrH6m_JfqkyPNtKLDeGP57Hke02FX67aNNGJQCfnJqaJw+A@mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: list
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
In-Reply-To: <CAM2xrH6m_JfqkyPNtKLDeGP57Hke02FX67aNNGJQCfnJqaJw+A@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.1 (2017-09-22)

Hello,

Jos=E9 Mar=EDa Garc=EDa P=E9rez wrote:

> 2. Should I create a new package (call it swig2)?

I think this sounds more reasonable. It is already done with llvm and python
for example. Of course file names shouldn't be conflicting, in case you plan
to make it unconflicting with swig.

> 3. Is it OK to "embed" the particular library version in the package that
> requires it?

What about making a package with this old library version? Same conditions =
as
above.


Cheers

--=20
ca=F3c



---
Unsubscribe:  alpine-aports+unsubscribe@lists.alpinelinux.org
Help:         alpine-aports+help@lists.alpinelinux.org
---