Re: Merging partman
- To: debian-boot@lists.debian.org
- Subject: Re: Merging partman
- From: Colin Watson <cjwatson@debian.org>
- Date: Mon, 4 Jul 2005 10:01:01 +0100
- Message-id: <[🔎] 20050704090101.GA5345@riva.ucam.org>
- Mail-followup-to: debian-boot@lists.debian.org
- In-reply-to: <20050624194440.GA26778@kitenet.net>
- References: <20050509144605.GI16686@riva.ucam.org> <20050510011643.GC2883@kitenet.net> <20050510113322.GC10096@riva.ucam.org> <20050510132509.GA18072@logic.fmi.uni-sofia.bg> <20050510181327.GA16340@kitenet.net> <20050624171239.GB20722@master.debian.org> <20050624194440.GA26778@kitenet.net>
On Fri, Jun 24, 2005 at 03:44:40PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> Colin Watson wrote:
> > I was thinking more of leaving a subdirectory's debian/ directory there
> > as an example for third-party components.
>
> You mean just one?
Actually I suppose it would be possible to write a top-level debian/
directory that just calls debian/rules in all the subdirectories and
collects together the results, so that there's no duplication and the
subdirectories themselves remain valid source packages that one can use
as examples. Anton, would that be acceptable to you?
> > How about renaming partman to partman-core, to free up the name? That
> > makes more sense to me anyway.
>
> Or partman-base. Makes sense.
I like partman-base. If there are no objections, I'll do that rename
this week.
Cheers,
--
Colin Watson [cjwatson@debian.org]
Reply to: