Re: "goals" for slink: FHS
On Wed, 29 Jul 1998, Raul Miller wrote:
> And I guess a third option would be to have fhs compliance be represented
> as an empty package, which conflicts with package versions not supporting
> it (man, info, ...), and package versions supplying files in the new
> locations (everything that has a moved location) depending on fhs.
More generally, a package named something like dversion might
be introduced. The dversion package would be versioned with the
debian release version number (would have been dversion_2.0 for hamm,
would be dversion_2.1 for slink, etc., and might be something like
dversion_2.1-3.prerelease during slink prerelease, etc.). Packages having
a debian release version sensitivity would then declare an appropriate
version-specific dependency on dversion. Packages referencing /usr/share
would depend on dversion (>= 2.1), as would packages implementing or
requiring other system characteristics introduced for the debian 2.1
release.
dversion might be made to depend on packages which supply release-specific
compatibility (e.g., man and info packages which search /usr/share/man),
or it might not. I am a bit uneasy doing this that this might get messy.
The /etc/debian_version file might be moved from the base-files package
to dversion.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: