Re: Packaging sysfsutils: static library?
On 2003-10-13 1:45 +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> BTW, I may have been missing something as I did not read the beginning
> of this thread, but I don't see the point of packaging sysfsutils:
It is a separate upstream package.
> as it's part of the udev source package
Well, they copied the library to udev because the upstream package
does not provide a shared library yet. But the utilities (lsusb and
sysfstool) and its documentation aren't part of udev. Maybe these two
upstream packages will be merged in the future.
> (which I ITP'ed some weeks ago)
Am I missing something? bugs.d.o/wnpp does not contain the word
'udev' and only once 'sysfs' (#215257, the ITP I'm talking about). I
also cannot find your name in wnpp.
> it will be uploaded to the archive by me when it will be actually
> useful for something.
In the meantime I also prepared a package, including manpages and
everything, since it is useful already in the sense that it fulfills
its intended meaning (although I won't let it go into sarge). What a
I still would be interested in it, but if you already have a package,
then I won't stand in the way (although, to be honest, I feel a little
bit fooled). But please tell other people about your intents by filing
a proper ITP the next time! In the time I created the package I could
as well have fixed some other bugs.
Okay, maybe we could merge the efforts. IMHO it does not make much
sense to have a separate package with lsusb and systool, they could be
integrated into the udev package. I can send you all the additional
stuff (library documentation, userspace tools and manpages) for
inclusion) if you really want to merge the upstream packages.