Re: Applixware / Packaging Proprietary Software
Joey Hess <joey@kitenet.net> writes:
> Sven Rudolph wrote:
> > Some problems:
> >
> > - alien doesn't grok package renaming:
>
> Package renaming is weird, anyway. What's the benefit?
More descriptive naming; avoiding namespace pollution.
Original names vs. my names:
axbase applixware-base
apxeng applixware-english
apxfrn applixware-french
apxgrm applixware-german
axart applixware-clipart
axdocu applixware-docu
axlang applixware-lang
bookeng applixware-book-english
bookfrn applixware-book-french
bookgrm applixware-book-german
helpeng applixware-help-english
helpfrn applixware-help-french
helpgrm applixware-help-german
We have filesystems where the names can be beyond 8.3, and in addition
we don't have to rely on the filesystem to store the package
names. Otherwise we will end up with package names like SUNWsbum ...
> > I just saw that latest alien already provides support for packaging
> > applixware. (BTW: Calling these applix is wrong; Applix is the name of
> > the company that owns Applixware ...)
>
> Applix is what redhat calls it. I don't see any reason to deviate from that.
IMHO it is simply wrong, and that makes a reason to change it. (We
don't package GNU Fileutils under the name `gnu' just because it is
the only part of the name that fits in 8.3.)
Sven
--
Sven Rudolph <sr1@inf.tu-dresden.de>
http://www.sax.de/~sr1/
--
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: