Re: debstd trouble with multi-binary package
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On 6 Jul 1998, Adam P. Harris wrote:
> Martin Schulze <joey@tapiola.Infodrom.North.DE> writes:
> > debstd is depricated, use the debhelper instead.
>
> [...] which ones are deprecated and which are supported, [...]
Interesting. Is deprecated the opposite of supported?
What does "supported" exactly mean? You can still submit bugs against
debmake, and if the fix is obvious, they will be fixed.
BTW: Is un-debhelper-izing a package as easy as un-debstd-izing it?
How many lines do you have to change to un-debhelper-ize a debhelper-ized
package? And how many to un-debstd-ize a debstd-ized package?
If we are going to "deprecate" things, why don't we just deprecate all
package building tools at the same time?
BTW2: What happened with the package building tool Ian Jackson was going
to write, which required no run-time module?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3ia
Charset: latin1
iQCVAgUBNaEljyqK7IlOjMLFAQFuRgP/c8KjPlCn43kQW1FZiHB7nEztrQfZWQ+h
fDMag3T/3kpXB7lKq/w7L7xNPaftzoc+PJ63dU0qlESJym+s+s9Xnb8u3rBKNCzo
PFfOJsf1wLFft+ERBbryxD14g5nwrt825qEoMDfTw14Emfr5TwOyLtQFQ1kzcacc
v6/MxoNMHsc=
=zxn9
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: