On Tue, Aug 13, 2019 at 11:05:33AM -0700, Joseph Herlant wrote: > > Yes, this is the third email on this in the last month, previous two > > didn't get any replies. > > Sorry I didn't mean to anger you or be disrespectful in any way. My > apologies if I did. I wasn't angered, the second of those was mine and I didn't notice the first one. > I was off the list for a bit (because I unsubscribed from all of them > for personal reasons) and didn't find what I was looking for while > searching in the archive. > > > I don't think 12.3 mentions source packages or describes what to do when > > there are multiple main subpackages. > > That's what I wanted to clarify as there are mention of "package" and > "binary package" I wanted to make sure that package (as not "binary > package") was referring to source package. I don't think it means the source package, and several things there suggest it's a binary one. This includes the file path clause itself, as "/usr/share/doc/package" definitely means using the binary package name. -- WBR, wRAR
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature