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

Re: lprng as 'stantard' package (was: Re: Test packages for libc6 2.1.91+cvs)

Is there a formal procedure to put a package in standard? cupsys could
go to standard as well.

Craig Small writes:
 > On Tue, Jul 11, 2000 at 06:58:20PM -0300, Henrique M Holschuh wrote:
 > > Still, if you'd rather have lpr/lpd as "extra", LPRNg would have to be
 > > changed to "standard" so that UNIX network-aware printing services are
 > > available in the standard install.  The LPRNg maintainer (added by me to cc:
 > > list) might want to say something about this.
 > I am the current maintainer of LPRng for Debian.  I already have
 > packages that appear in standard or higher (procps appears on boot
 > floppies) so I know about what happens there.
 > LPRng could go into standard, its reasonably stable except for the last
 > month or so (and that appears in the unstable dist).  I still not exactly 
 > happy with the post/pre inst/rm scripts but they should be largely stable.
 > I have a reasonably good working relationship with the upstream
 > maintainer Patrick Powell and he does actively maintain LPRng. Actually
 > he's probably my best upstream maintainer, even including packages where
 > I am that upstream!
 > I don't really care either way what is decided, of course when someone
 > does decide let me know.  I'll go buy that extra 18 G hard disk for the
 > incoming bug mail :)

Reply to: