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

Re: Bug#709237: ITP: meta-suckless-tools -- meta-package installs simple commands for minimalistic window managers

Maybe there should not be a separate package for each tool, but at
least st and dmenu should be packaged separately.
Moreover, there IS a package named stterm in unstable which ships st
separately (I've found it then published ITP for my version of st). It
lacks Breaks/Conflicts with suckless-tools 38, but will overwrite it

Additionally, there was requests for packaging for xssstatus, which is
(by upstream) a part of suckless-tools too, but (as for other
suckless-tools) have separate tarball. For example, if xsstools will
be included in main package, then «tools for minimalist window
managers» will depend on xscreensaver even if they also includes dumb
x locker. So, at least two or three of the tools already have reasons
for making separate packages for them, that's not good — it's better
then packages for one vendor organized in some common way.

On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 2:09 AM, Joerg Jaspert <joerg@debian.org> wrote:
> On 13218 March 1977, Dmitry Papchenkoff wrote:
>> 10 packages, excluding metapackage.
>> This work was originally done for test-packages for mentors.debian.net
>> as an effort to update and clean up suckless-tools.
>> But after posting packages to mentors I was requested to make ITP-bugs for it.
>> So, I'll post ITP just for two packages and wait if maintainer or
>> other users find it useful (if any)
> 10 packages for tools that in total in one package currently have an
> installed size of ~190kb from one upstream? Thats not a good idea, quite
> the contrary.
> --
> bye, Joerg
> [...]that almost anything related to "intellectual property" is idiotic
> by it's nature, [...]

Reply to: