On Thu, Sep 18, 2003 at 11:17:44AM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote: >I hate to do this at this late point (and I *really* hate it when people >do it to me) but I didn't notice the slightly nonstandard practice of >naming the binary 'aspell-bin'. I'd like to change that. Otherwise >we have a base package which only contains source, which is also >unusual. I'd prefer to "mv aspell-{bin-,}0.50.3-1.tar.bz2" and >put it at the top level of the aspell directory and move everything else >underneath it. > >Gareth, do you have a problem with that?
I just re-noticed that tetex also has a -bin package. What do people think about this? I would like to be consistent in package naming and it seems like most packages put their binaries in a package sans -bin. There is an empty tetex package but I don't understand the need to complicate things this way. XFree86 also does this and I am, again, not sure why it's needed. cgf