Re: Announcing type-handling
On Thu, Jan 01, 2004 at 11:58:44AM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> 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"?
I still don't know what the hell it *does*.