Георги Данчев wrote: > Yes, I received that OK, sorry I got the opposite impression.
> However, it doesn't strike me like extremely elegant design to ship > a file with the package (to please certain design decisions taken in > another package, dictionaries-common in that case) which will then > be regenerated by the maintainer scripts. AFAICT, you don't have to ship an empty file in the package [1], you just have to take care to remove it. It's just that Anton decided to do this for bg.rws, so I followed the same approach for the other file. [1] The manpage uses the mild words "You are also suggested to..." > I really want to get to the bottom of it whether > aspell-autobuildhash really needs the approach mentioned in the > man-page. It doesn't need it, I think (a proof is that bg-en.rws was not a file in the package before bgoffice/3.0-11, but it was still generated). The only discomfort is having unowned files in /var/lib/aspell, and taking care to remove them manually on remove/purge. Probably the process could be triggerized, if it's not too much work. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
