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

Re: Doc packages

|| On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 23:55:43 +0200 (CEST)
|| Andreas Tille <tillea@rki.de> wrote: 

at> On Wed, 30 Jun 2004, Otavio Salvador wrote:
at> Sure, but it should prepare a ready to run debian/control file for
at> *all* CDDs to keep necessary editing as low as possible for
at> meta package builders.  If the CDD meta package source needs different
at> Build dependencies you will have to do extra editing and research
at> which is not really hard but breaks the consistency.
>> Yes. cdd-dev is to help to build meta-packages but this doesn't force
>> to the built packages have the same build-deps of cdd source packages.
at> I was not talking about the cdd package but about *different* CDDs
at> for instance NP, Med, Jr, Edu - -I would like to keep their
at> Build-Dependencies the same.

Andreas, sorry but what the people does with cdd-dev package should
not interest to us. He uses it how  and when he likes.

For example, Liberdade, this use cdd-dev and build udeb too. So I
cannot use the default rules fine.

>> The only build-deps NEEDED to use cdd-dev is cdd-dev itself. How
>> cdd-dev is built and what this need is not user busines, IMHO.
at> Sure.

>> So you want cdd source itself looks like the package built to use
>> cdd-dev? it?
at> Now.  Perhaps you might reread the mail I wrote about different
at> documentation tools inside different Custom Debian Distributions.

Now I understand you but I think how others CDDs does your packages
and how cdd source package is built are different cases and one should
not change the other. They indepent.

To me, the doc merge is the right thing to do.

        O T A V I O    S A L V A D O R
 E-mail: otavio@debian.org      UIN: 5906116
 GNU/Linux User: 239058     GPG ID: 49A5F855
 Home Page: http://www.freedom.ind.br/otavio
"Microsoft gives you Windows ... Linux gives
 you the whole house."

Attachment: pgpoC8DK2uNDF.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: