On Sun, 2012-09-16 at 21:11 +0200, Paul Gevers wrote: > Hi > > [I am not the maintainer of Lazarus, but interested as I maintain a > dependency: Winff.] > > On 16-09-12 13:49, Justin B Rye wrote: > > Paul Gevers wrote: > >> In the control.in file, I notice a lot of metapackages which had not > >> architecture: all. This is not really translation related but anyway. I > >> could imaging that it ensures that on all platforms it depends on the > >> correct version in that architecture, but is that really what we want? > > > > I don't know what you want; I'm not even sure what happens with > > meta/dependency-packages in cases like this. (So much for "compile > > anywhere"!) > > I would say, this is up to the maintainer, but I suggest to use > architecture All for all metapackages. Yes could be changed to Architecture: all > > Wait, don't you mean "one set of configuration files"? (And capitalised > > "Lazarus".) > > Yes. Confirm > >> Therefore the update-alternatives can be used to switch between > >> versions of the configuration files. > > > > No need for "the", and I'm not sure about that "therefore". Maybe it > > should be "instead"? And it would be clearer if it said something > > about switching to an appropriate config to match the Lazarus version. > > > > (Or is it that you switch the "lazarus" alternative to match the > > "lazarus-ide" alternative?) > > I tried to understand the logic in the package and I think all > alternatives are slave by default (see below). > > > All these references to "configuration files" get repetitive. > > Agreed. > > > Okay, this is making a lot more sense. > > Thanks, that is what I wanted to achieve. > > > _Description: Rename "/etc/lazarus" to "/etc/lazarus.bak"? > > There is a real directory at /etc/lazarus, probably from a previous > > installation. However, Lazarus now supports keeping multiple versions > > Let's make it explicit that it is the Lazarus SUITE that support the > multiple versions. > > > installed at the same time and using the alternatives system to set a > > default version for: > > * lazarus-ide (the IDE); > > * lazarus (the configuration file and helper tools). > > configuration files > > Looking into it, I now see that there are more items in the alternatives > system for Lazarus. As they are by default all in slave mode, do we need > to mention a list? This would avoid some of the confusion latter on, I > would say the /etc/lazarus/ issue in this template is PART of the > Lazarus multiple version support. Let's try to make that clear. > > So again some improvement: > > _Description: Rename "/etc/lazarus" to "/etc/lazarus.bak"? > The Lazarus suite now supports keeping multiple versions installed > at the same time and using the alternatives system to set proper > defaults. Normally, the latest version of any component is used. > . > To use the alternatives system on the system-wide configuration > of the Lazarus suite, /etc/lazarus needs to be under control of the > alternatives system. Currently there is a real directory at > /etc/lazarus, probably from a previous installation. In order to > start using the alternatives system on the configuration you must > accept renaming "/etc/lazarus". If you don't, you will need to > review the configuration on every version update of Lazarus as, > unfortunately, the configuration files are not always > backward-compatible. Also switching between different versions might > need more intervention. > . > If you have made changes to your configuration files, you will > probably need to review them and apply them to all versioned > configurations, as they will not automatically propagate. > > I hope I did not misunderstand how the package uses the alternatives > system and I believe the above text is a lot clearer in what the user > should take into account to determine the answer here. I'm globally OK with this. I think we can freeze this and call for internationalization. Cheers,
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part