Re: Uploaded tnt_1.1a3-1_i386.deb to master
Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Hi,
> I just saw a package being announced on debian-devel-changes,
> namely, tnt. I did not see it being announced as intended to package
> (I may have missed it, in which case I apologize); I think that this
> was now policy? In any case, that is a trivial thing compared to what
I couldn't find any reference to a new package with an old maintainer
in the documentation. Asking on IRC, the response was just to package it.
I doubt if anyone would be working on tnt.
>
> * Modified source code to fit FHS and compile on libc6
>
> The libc6 is good; FHS -- is not so very good. I thought we
> are holding off on the FHS until after 2.0 is released? (This could
> have been something clarified on the intent to package discussion).
>
> What exactly does this mean? What was done to make it conform
> to FHS that would contravene FSSTND (and hence current policy)? I
> think the move to FHS should be taken as an concerted effort, not
> piecemeal, package by package.
AFAIK for my package there is no significant difference between FHS and
FSSTND.
What it means is that the programs originally were written very much like
a DOS program, ie all the config files etc had to be in the current directory
and there was no order about them. I just did some cleaning up.
> Should this be moved to the policy list?
I'm not on the policy list so if you are talking about tnt in particular
you'll have to CC me in to comment.
BTW, if anyone is thinking of compiling ax.25 stuff with libc6 there is a
fair amount of changes to put into the includes (they have a problem).
I'll be taking that up with the right channels.
-Craig
--
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: