Re: RFS: lksctp - user level libraries and header files for kernel SCTP implementation
Anibal Monsalve Salazar wrote:
On Wed, Apr 14, 2004 at 05:19:43PM -0400, Michael Biebl wrote:
[..]
Please retitle 199972.
To change the titles of a bug report, send an email to
control@bugs.debian.org with the following subject (or something
similar):
wnpp: retitle 199972 ITP: lksctp - user level libraries and header files for kernel SCTP implementation
and with the following three lines in the body of the message:
package wnpp
retitle 199972 ITP: lksctp - user level libraries and header files for kernel SCTP implementation
thanks
You could put anything else after the third line. For more information
see [0] and [1].
Please read [2] if you haven't done so.
Don't forget to put an entry in debian/changelog with 'closes: #199972'.
Please read [3] and change your debian/copyright accordingly.
Please read [4] for information about the description.
[0] http://www.debian.org/devel/wnpp/
[1] http://www.debian.org/Bugs/server-control
[2] http://people.debian.org/~mpalmer/debian-mentors_FAQ.html
[3] http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2003/debian-devel-announce-200312/msg00007.html
[4] http://people.debian.org/~walters/descriptions.html
Hello Anibal, thanks for your reply!
To [3]+[4]: I tried to improve it and made an updated version online
To [1]: Before I retitle #199972 I wanted to hear your opinion on the
following issue:
The author of lksctp calls his project "lksctp" but he packaged the
sourcecode as "lksctp-tools-1.0.0.tar.gz".
So dh_make proposed to call the package "lksctp-tools". I then went on
and split off the library and the development files and called them
"libsctp1" and "libsctp-dev" as I tried to adhere to the debian naming
policy. I put the remaining doc files in the package "lksctp-tools-doc"
Now I think it's more reasonable to rename "lksctp-tools" to "lksctp"
and "lksctp-tools-doc" to "lksctp-doc" although it doesn't reflect the
tarball name anymore. I would also rather change the entries in
debian/changelog and the Source field in debian/control to lksctp.
Do you also think this sounds more reasonable?
As soon as this point is clarified I will retitle the aforementioned bug
and then hope to find a sponsor for this imho interesting package.
Best regards,
Michael
--
------------------------------------------------------------
E-Mail: biebl@teco.edu
WWW: http://www.teco.edu/
TecO (Telecooperation Office) Vincenz-Priessnitz-Str.1
University of Karlsruhe 76131 Karlsruhe, Germany
------------------------------------------------------------
Reply to: