[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: X Strike Force SVN commit: rev 183 - in branches/4.3.0/sid/debian: . patches

On Fri, Jun 13, 2003 at 03:44:12AM +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 13, 2003 at 09:27:31AM +0900, ISHIKAWA Mutsumi wrote:
> > >>>>> In <[🔎] 20030612222214.GB542@aragorn> 
> > >>>>>	Robert Millan <zeratul2@wanadoo.es> wrote:
> > 
> > >> btw, if someone is going to fix gnu.cf, please consider splitting it
> > >> into a gnu-common.cf file so that it can be shared with gnu-freebsd.cf
> > >> (see the header comments in patch #820)
> > 
> >  I just wrote same idea into my TODO list
> > (xfree86/people/ishikaawa/TODO).
> > 
> >  I'm planning to work for this hack on this weekend :-)
> glad to hear that!
> after looking at your TODO, i have a pair of comments on your plan:
> - i think site.def is a more adequate place for debian-specific stuff
>   see what the upstream docs say about site.def (INSTALL-X.org, section 3.5)
> - you're moving stuff into debian.cf that isn't actualy debian-specific.
>   when i said "gnu-common.cf" i meant stuff common to GNUish systems
>   (mostly related to Glibc and userland), but not debian-specific. [1]
> I think we should take care to do these modifications in a way that they are
> acceptable for upstream. So if you split into gnu-common.cf the common
> stuff that isn't debian-specific, and into debian.cf (or site.def) the
> debian-specific stuff, we'd just have to send gnu-common.cf to upstream
> and maintain debian.cf/site.def in debian.
> [1] as of now GNU/Hurd and GNU/*BSD only exist in Debian, but we can't
>     assume that for a configuration file.

And the NetBSD one is *not* GNU-based, which is even more reason to split
the Debian-specific bits into a different file from the GNU-specific bits.
Joel Baker <fenton@debian.org>

Attachment: pgpJ4ahIZFeyf.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: