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

Bug#512136: Acknowledgement (ITP: nox -- nox -- Meta package)

I forgot to 'X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel'... so I'm forwarding it.

Subject: ITP: nox -- nox -- Meta package
Package: wnpp
Owner: Frank Lin PIAT <fpiat@klabs.be>
Severity: wishlist

* Package name    : nox
  Version         : 0.1
  Upstream Author : Frank Lin PIAT <fpiat@klabs.be>
* URL             : http://www.klabs.be/~fpiat/linux/debian/proposals/2009-01-17_nox/
* License         : GPL
  Programming Lang: n.a
  Description     : nox -- Meta packages
    No-X is a suite of shell tools, either command line or Curses based,
    that are useful for people that don't use X-Window.
    Binary packages:
     - nox-base, depends on the most common command line tools, that are
       suitable for most systems (desktop and servers).
     - nox-desktop-environment, which is very complete No-X metapackage for
       desktop user. It attempts to provides many functionality provided by
       graphical desktop environnements, but only text and ncurse based.
     - fb-desktop-environment is similar to above, but also have some graphical
       progams (using framebuffer... not for vt100 terminals ;-)
     - nox-base provides a reduced set of tools that many users might want
       to add to a standard system.
     - nox-system-tools provides a large set of tools, suitable on both
       end-users systems and servers.
     - nox-server-tools provides a set of tools, that one probably want on
       a servers.
     - nox-network-clients depends on many usual network tools and clients.

The idea comes from wiki pages like http://wiki.debian.org/Console where 
visitors/contributors seems to like to install some extra command-line tools.

The current debian/control draft is included below[1]. The current dependencies
on package with priority=standard are going to go away (like "less"), unless
there are useful alternatives in which case It might depends on either (?).


[1] http://bugs.debian.org/512136

Reply to: