On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 20:41:07 +0100 Harry Rickards <hrickards@l33tmyst.com> wrote: > >> I am looking for a sponsor for my package "ah". > > > > Can't this use a better name, like antihex ? > > > > At least that tells me something about what the package can do. Or > > maybe something like hex2dec or similar. > > > > How does this compare with existing tools for this purpose? > > > >> It builds these binary packages: > >> ah - converts hex to decimal. > > > > Same here. > > > It's not actually my program, it's someone from Sourceforge's. That's not uncommon - and not a reason to stick with the upstream name for the Debian package names. > I'm just > packaging it form them. The sourceforge project name is antihex, so I'll > change the package name to antihex. I'll leave the binary as ah though, > as that's what they put in the Makefile. Just to be clear, you're proposing to change the Debian source package name and Debian binary package name to 'antihex' and keep the actual filename as /usr/bin/ah ? That's OK. Using the sourceforge project name for the package names is a good choice. As Russ pointed out in another thread, if the source package builds a single binary, it's best to have the source package and the binary package with the same name. The name of the executable is harder to change (but can be done). Make sure you document this change in the ITP - including retitling the ITP to use the changed package name. -- Neil Williams ============= http://www.data-freedom.org/ http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/ http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
Attachment:
pgpsNMKyEbYJl.pgp
Description: PGP signature