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

Re: changes to the doom-wad virtual package

On Sat, 2006-09-23 at 19:34 +0100, Jon Dowland wrote:

G'day Jon,

> We therefore need a pair of virtual packages.
> I propose doom-wad is kept and used to mean "a vanilla-doom
> compatible IWAD" and a new boom-wad virtual package is added
> to describe an IWAD which requires boom. This would require
> the following changes:
> prboom changed so that 
> 	Depends: freedoom | doom-wad | boom-wad
> lxdoom also. I/we need to talk to Joe Drew about lxdoom.
> It's not a games-team package atm, it could be, but afaik it
> is pretty much supersceded by prboom upstream.
> freedoom changed so it Provides: boom-wad
> no changes to doom-wad-shareware (not a games-team package)
> no changes to chocolate-doom, edge, jdoom
> I'd also have to set Conflicts: so that packages were
> upgraded lock-step.
> Any objections? I'll implement the changes and build new
> packages, and update doom-packaging with the new guidelines
> within the next few days.

No objections from me (the deng packager/upstream). It will be a long
while before we have full boom support, and I do get tired of the bug
reports that it doesn't work with freedoom correctly.

Jamie Jones
E-Yagi Consulting
ABN: 32 138 593 410
Mob: +61 4 16 025 081
Email: eyagi.consulting@gmail.com
Web: http://www.eyagiconsulting.com

GPG/PGP signed mail preferred. No HTML mail. No MS Word attachments
PGP Key ID 0x4B6E7209
Fingerprint E1FD 9D7E 6BB4 1BD4 AEB9 3091 0027 CEFA 4B6E 7209

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Reply to: