Re: Question about maintaining the unofficial/parallel apache-lingerd package.
On 19/11/2004 Kevin B. McCarty wrote:
> IMO it would be less confusing if your source package did not generate
> the same binary packages as the official apache package in the cases
> where the code is the same (apache, apache-dbg, apache-perl, apache-ssl,
> apache-utils, apache-common [excepting /usr/sbin/apache-modconf]).
in my eyes the best would be to tune the unofficial sources to only
generate one apache-lingerd package, and make that one depend on
apache-common.
> 1) Have your source package create a binary package
> "apache-modconf-lingerd", which Depends on apache-common; contains only
> the modified apache-modconf binary (and required /usr/share/doc files);
> and uses dpkg-divert to move the apache-modconf from apache-common out
> of the way.
dpkg-divert should be the best solution, but why not doing that directly
within the apache-lingerd package.
> 2) Have apache-lingerd depend upon apache-modconf-lingerd.
i see no objections against merging apache-lingerd and
apache-modconf-lingerd. apache-lingerd could include the dpkg-divert
stuff and provide a patched apache-modconf itself.
i see no usage for a seperate apache-modconf-lingerd package.
bye
jonas
Reply to: