Re: (upstream-)contrib, /usr/doc, and Depends
On Mon, Jul 19, 1999 at 09:11:36AM -0400, Peter S Galbraith wrote:
> "James M. Mastros" wrote:
> > /usr/doc/naim/examples is wrong because they aren't really
> > examples.
> That's the only place they _can_ go. I agree that we need a new
> directory for such things.
I'm keeping them where they are (/usr/share/naim/contrib) for now, until
somebody comes up with a better place (neither bin nor doc/.../examples are
better, nor is a separate package (too much overhead, too little gain)).
The FHS and debian-policy seem to allow it, though I'm not too thrilled with
it; it just dosn't feel right.
> > 3) Do I have to depend on tclsh for one minor contrib program?
> > (Policy says yes.)
> Actually, Policy doesn't say that _everything_ can be expected to
> work when the dependencies are met.
But scripts policy requires a dependency (little d) on non-POSIX shell
interpreters -- 4.4 para 2 at the end.
> You might want to `suggest' depend on tclsh and mention the
> requirement in your README.debian file at the same place you
> mention the `example' scripts.
Done. A updated packaging is available at http://rtweb.net/theorb/debian/,
or will be when this blasted hunk of overweight steel builds it. It also
fixes a minor upstream bug, and moves the docs and manpage (empty, as
upstream; needs to be written) to /usr/share.
I'm still looking for a real debian-developer to take it over until I get
confirmed, which might be quite a bit as I havn't applied yet.
-=- James Mastros
--
Fruenlaben!
-- Crazy director-man, Animanics
Reply to: