[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: slgdbm_1.6-2_i386.changes is NEW

On Tue, 27 Sep 2005 23:03:21 +0200, Rafael Laboissiere <rafael@debian.org> said:

> * Alastair McKinstry <mckinstry@computer.org> [2005-09-27 21:16]:

> > My preference is for slang-foo, as it is more visible that it is
> > a slang-related, rather than a generic DSO; slang-gdbm is more 
> > interesting to a slang developer than to a gdbm one, and this shows that.


> I would keep the first version really short.  The only two things that
> are important for now is the package naming, the installation directory
> for the modules, and maybe the dependency relationships.  The upstream
> Makefile for slgdbm installs the module in
> /usr/share/slsh/local-packages, but I moved it to /usr/share/slsh.

Rather it installs the module in /usr/local/lib/slang/v2/modules, and a
gdbm.sl script in /usr/local/share/slsh/local-packages, which is probably
what you mean.

> Do you think this is correct?  As regards dependency relationships,
> slgdbm has:

> Suggests: slsh (>= 2.0) | jed (>= 0.99.17) | slrn (>=

> I do not know whether this is appropriate or not.

Well, it is possible to compile the gdbm module with slang 1 - of
course you'd have to edit the Makefile to install in v1/modules.

Reply to: