[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Working on debian developer's reference and "best packaging practices"

>>"Anthony" == Anthony Towns <aj@azure.humbug.org.au> writes:

 Anthony> On Mon, May 06, 2002 at 05:19:09PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
 >> >>"Anthony" == Anthony Towns <aj@azure.humbug.org.au> writes:
 Anthony> The real question is whether maintainers are meant to build
 Anthony> using the features of dpkg, or the ones listed in
 >> *Sigh*. Let me see if I can dot the i's and cross the t's. A
 >> package should be buildable using the bits mentioned in policy. Any
 >> package may, however, choose to add any extra bits added by dpkg,
 >> (perhaps buigld depending on a new dpjg version if the change is not
 >> compatible with older versions).

 Anthony> This, uh, doesn't make sense.


 Anthony> 	"A package should be buildable using nothing more than
 Anthony> 	 [foo]. Unless it chooses not to be."

 Anthony> ...seems to be what you just said. 

	Umm. I fail to see how else I can define sufficient, and
 optional, new, added features.  Policy defines the minimal,
 sufficient interface.

 The King and his advisor are overlooking the battle field: King: "How
 goes the battle plan?" Advisor: "See those little black specks
 running to the right?" K: "Yes." A: "Those are their guys. And all
 those little red specks running to the left are our guys. Then when
 they collide we wait till the dust clears." K: "And?" A: "If there
 are more red specks left than black specks, we win." K: "But what
 about the ^#!!$% battle plan?" A: "So far, it seems to be going
 according to specks."
Manoj Srivastava   <srivasta@debian.org>  <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05  CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B  924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C

To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

Reply to: