On Fri, 1 Sep 2000, Hubert Feyrer wrote:

> On Fri, 1 Sep 2000, David Brownlee wrote:
> > 	One final question - if we rename the package to netscape
> > 	(which I'd like to do as people can then build a 'netscape'
> > 	package and have the right thing happen), then we should
> > 	probably crank the version to 4.75?
> 
> Not sure.
> Will you pull in navigator or communicator?
	
	Conditional dependency on {communicator,navigator}.

> Maybe we should add a 'netscape' meta package that will pull in the
> ns-remote and one of the browsers.

	We end up with most of the same problem - what to call that
	package, though that is a cleaner solution given it allows
	people to install ns-remote without 'netscape' and for ns-remote
	to have its own version number.


	How about:

	ns-remote package stays as it is, with enhanced ns-open.

	new netscape package that depends on ns-remote and
	{communicator,navigator}, and installs a symlink from netscape
	to ns-open. The netscape package takes its version from the
	communicator/navigator package.

                David/absolute
			       -- www.netbsd.org: A pmap for every occasion --