FHS transition (was: Re: RFC: gnupg)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Sun, 5 Jul 1998 aqy6633@acf5.nyu.edu wrote:
>> ? Is something inherent in dpkg going to be affected by FHS?
>> Certainly not all packages have files in directories that have been
>> changed between FSSTND and FHS...
>
>Unfortunately, it will concern ALL pacakges at least because of
>/usr/doc -> /usr/share/doc change.
Ohboy. Yeah, I hadn't thought about that. I guess all doc files
qualify as architecture-independent, don't they :)
>That's why I thing we should drop FHS transition requirement from 2.1 goals.
Well, the way I understand what Ian was proposing, and what others
have suggested in terms of a package pool, "requirements" are supposed
to be going away in between releases, but yes, I don't think that all
packages are going to be FHS-ready in 4 months, and our goal is to be
having a new release about that often, no?
For that matter, what is the current status of what developers
should be doing about the FHS transition? Should we be starting to
reupload our packages to unstable with the /usr/share/doc changes?
=============================================================================
Zed Pobre <zed@va.debian.org> | PGP key on servers, fingerprint on finger
=============================================================================
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 5.0
Charset: noconv
iQEVAwUBNaAMNdwPDK/EqFJbAQFuiggAvihgDIarzPcTzmalIyrtJ10j5wbgI2TH
UNXjpel7Te7EaM+s/f1zwDctl2a/Ww9s+CXEx2JR2s7NYgm4yK+kGjiP9/wFcGun
GtcOmqHVHopg6j/SXBfXuckzVw13FC//TIEvEppljgIsiken5AJkFqpa5taWoeR1
SL/Mo42ysk75OVPPDg2ANhAHjy+7YqO2IsAKyp5KW92ScWULftLijOSpLsMVWvfl
xQ8gH9pfl68Tm1ENiAtsXAmrWP4TLCyz05ij9xT4KXR+4WqztFZfoiP2TSvfn/8X
1BQBHu9+ZYP2RtXQiQG2N40ZMGFC1NuZhHwovYVEBPNd8CK61kcVQg==
=RGPt
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: