Re: Announcing type-handling
On Wed, Dec 31, 2003 at 03:49:00PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 31, 2003 at 10:54:18AM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> > I think TYPE makes sense in the context of dpkg-architecture, but not by
> > itself.
> > Consider arch-type-handling, as that is quite obvious to me.
> > type-handling is going to be a non-stop source of confusion.
> Well, since packages are not expected to [Build-]Depend on this package
> directly, but rather only on the virtual packages it Provides, changing
> the name shouldn't be much of a problem.
> How does "dpkg-type" sound to you?
Better, but I think it needs to mention "arch". "dpkg-arch-type"?
thanks & HNY,
Hamish Moffatt VK3SB <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org>