On 07-10-13 14:47, Graham Inggs wrote: > On 05/10/2013 19:22, Paul Gevers wrote: >> What I intended you to do is to state the above also in bug 412811, so >> that it is clear for people looking at that bug report. And when you >> communicate with debian-legal, make sure the bug is in CC. > > I will do. I intend to follow up in both bugs after I have made further > progress and after the upload records me as the maintainer of > dxsamples. What I wrote in this bug was to let you know I was working > on both. I should have made that clear. Ack. But I still think you can comment on these bugs, even if technically you are not yet the maintainer. >> These directories don't exist, am I (and lintian) right? So why do you >> even want these symlinks? Speculating now, but maybe this was something >> from the past. > > My understanding is these symlinks link the samples and java directories > located in /usr/share/dx to where the main dx program expects to find > them in /usr/lib/dx. A similar relationship exists with the dx-doc > package where the main dx package has symlinks linking html and help > located in /usr/share/doc/dx into /usr/lib/dx. Ah, I now see what you mean. The /usr/share/dx/java/* and /usr/share/dx/samples/* are files in dxsamples. Why did you want to move them from dxsamples to dx? Most of the time, but certainly not always, I would put them in the package that provides the target files. This is also what lintian warns about, so I guess my idea is not strange. Paul
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature