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

Re: ITITP: xprint (X.org)

On Sun, Jun 02, 2002 at 03:53:32PM +1000, Drew Parsons wrote:
> I would therefore like to take his standalone xprint code and package it for
> Debian.  Any suggestions for naming?  xprint or xprt-x11 or ...??

I suggest xprint-xorg for the source package.  For the binary package I
recommend a down-cased version of the server executable's name.

> Of course, the X.org (or xprint.mozdev.org) xprint code should eventually
> fall down to into XFree86, but this will take time - apparentally the
> XFree86 code (font handling and other areas) is significantly different -
> and buggy - compared to X.org's original code.
> If there are no reasonable objections, I'll proceed in couple of weeks time
> (after assignments are finished ;) ).
> If anyone considered themself better qualified for the job and wants to
> do it, feel free to tell me so.

Please go ahead.  I have only the feeblest understanding of Xprt.

What is the name of the server binary that X.Org's xprint builds?  You
may need to C/R/P the xprt package.

I imagine that when X.Org's xprint finally does trickle down into
XFree86, I might want to rename my xprt package to xprint; certainly if
the binary has changed its name, but this might also leave you free to
package further developments in Xprint.  This would be similar to how
Mesa is a separate software project from XFree86, and yet it also
incorporated into the latter.  Thus my package is called "xlibmesa3",
for instance.

I'm happy to work with you on ensuring that my XFree86 packages and your
xprint package(s) coexist, or at least get each other out of the way
gracefully.  :)

G. Branden Robinson                |      To stay young requires unceasing
Debian GNU/Linux                   |      cultivation of the ability to
branden@debian.org                 |      unlearn old falsehoods.
http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |      -- Robert Heinlein

Attachment: pgpt26ec0ulGK.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: