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

are lsm files worth putting in binary package?

A few packages I have installed come with their lsm files in
/usr/doc/package/. I wonder if the lsm files are, in general important
enough to beplaced in a debian package. Disecting a typical lsm:

	Title: xtv         

(This is the package name and/or a short description. We already have that
 in the control file.)

	Version: 1.1        

(We already have version number, too)

	Description: Xtv grabs the screen of a remote display.
	Description: This package includes the "XmtdsGrab" widget

(We already have a package description.)

	Keywords: Xmtds XmtdsGrab widget xtv grab scroll adaptative display remote 

(This is maybe being added to deity.)

	Platforms: UX

(We don't have this info elsewhere.)

	Author: rancurel@capmedia.fr        
	Primary-site: sunsite.unc.edu  
	Original-site: sunsite.unc.edu
	Copying-policy: GPL

(All this should appear in the copyright file.)


So the only fields I see that we don't duplicate elsewhere is the platforms
field, which is only useful if you're compiling the source, and the keywords
field, which we will soon have (?). So it seems that a lsm file is a good 
resource when you are creating a package, but I don't see much point in 
including it in a binary package. Any objections if I file bug reports on 
the packages that do contain .lsm files?

see shy jo

TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org . 
Trouble?  e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .

Reply to: