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

Re: Release management and package announcements

Bill Mitchell writes ("Re: Release management and package announcements"):
> Ian Jackson <ian@chiark.chu.cam.ac.uk> said:
> > >    Somehow the FTP site maintainer's programs also need to know which
> > >    section (subdirectory) the files should go in.  I suggest that this
> > >    information be provided by the `overrides' file on the FTP site, which
> > >    is already used by the npdpkg program which generates the Packages
> > >    files.
> > > 
> > > Agreed.  I don't think the location should be decided by individual
> > > package maintainers, though they will be free to suggest a location.
> > 
> > The Section field from the control file can be used for this.
> I agree also that this should be decided centrally, but disagree about
> using the SECTION field for a maintainer's recommendations.  If we
> do that, "dpkg --info" and "dpkg --status" will give misleading
> information to users.
> If the SECTION field is not going to reliably contain the section name
> where the package is placed, it should be eliminated.

The (optional) Section information has to be there so that when a
package is installed but the user doesn't download a new Packages file
they still see the package in the right place in dselect.

Information from the Packages file(s) will take precedence, if there
is any, in dselect.  I could arrange for dpkg --status to use the
Packages file(s)' info if available, but I think that would be more


Reply to: