Re: move to subversion
Julian Gilbey <jdg@polya.uklinux.net> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 07, 2005 at 09:21:47PM +0200, Frank K?ster wrote:
>> Richard Lewis <rtf@jabble.com> wrote:
>>
>> >> We should probably have a copy of the sarge version in it, but
>> >> then, for tetex-base, there's the problem of the directory move. I
>> >> guess there isn't a "nice" solution for this?
>> >
>> > i'm not quite sure what you refer to,
>>
>> The tetex-texmf upstream tarball always unpacked the subdirectories of
>> TEXMF{DIST,MAIN} into the current directory. In tetex-base_2.0.2, the
>> tarball has been recreated to unpack into texmf/, but in 3.0 I have kept
>> it as it is, because dpkg can handle this by itself.
>
> That shouldn't affect the repository, though, which is only interested
> in the unpacked version.
But the unpacked version in sarge only has the subdirectories
tetex-base-2.0.2c/debian and tetex-base-2.0.2c/texmf, while etch is
going to have tetex-base-3.0/{context,debian,doc,fonts,tex,web2c} etc.
> I'll enquire about setting up a repository on svn.debian.org.
Many thanks for that.
Regards, Frank
--
Frank Küster
Inst. f. Biochemie der Univ. Zürich
Debian Developer
Reply to: