Re: Choosing a sensible name for a new package split from octave3.0
Rafael Laboissiere wrote:
> octave3.0-common (although, this package will not be "common" to several
> other, only to octave3.0)
It will be common to all architectures. Isn't that enough? Have a look
at airstrike or schroot, for example.
> octave3.0-data (although, this is not really "data", but "code" and
> other stuff)
This may qualify as "data"...
-extra is quite often used, too. I wouldn't use it if the main binary
package depends on it, though.
FYI, the most commonly used words in architecture-independant binary
> 171 i18n
> 190 ruby
> 191 dev
> 203 l10n
> 233 common
> 275 data
> 365 java
> 398 python
> 1057 doc
> 1231 perl
Clearly, -common and -data are clearly the most common general-purpose
suffixes for architecture-independant packages. I would probably use
-common in your case.