Re: Announcing type-handling
On Thu, Jan 01, 2004 at 11:58:44AM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> > 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"?
Too ugly.. what about dpkg-arch?
"[..] but the delight and pride of Aule is in the deed of making, and in the
thing made, and neither in possession nor in his own mastery; wherefore he
gives and hoards not, and is free from care, passing ever on to some new work."
-- J.R.R.T., Ainulindale (Silmarillion)