On Fri, 10 Feb 2012 09:15:53 -0400, David Bremner <david@tethera.net> wrote:
> On Thu,  9 Feb 2012 18:20:20 -0500, Daniel Kahn Gillmor <dkg@fifthhorseman.net> wrote:
> > libgmime-2.6-dev entered debian unstable today.  If 2.6 is available,
> > notmuch should build against 2.6 instead of 2.4, as 2.6 is the current
> > upstream stable version of libgmime.
> 
> Hi Daniel;
> 
> I'm not necessarily opposed to migrating to the Debian packages to gmime
> 2.6, but I'd like to point out that your patch is might be more decisive
> than intended, since the build daemons strip all but the first
> dependency. This will cause the build do fail if 2.6 is not
> available. For more discussion of this, see
> id:"20110920181701.GQ3245@codelibre.net" (debian-devel, Sept. 2011).

For the time being, should the order be:

- libgmime-2.4-dev,
+ libgmime-2.4-dev | libgmime-2.6-dev,

?

> 
> David

Tomi