Thanks Ansgar. Below my answers:
> > > Is it really necessary to have five binary package? > yes, because: "clean" is a library used by "boot-repair", "os-uninstaller" and "clean-ubiquity". "clean-gui" is a library used by "boot-repair" and "os-uninstaller" At least "clean" and "clean-gui" are too generic to me. > No problem to rename these packages (into "cleanpack" and "cleanpack-gui" for example). The problem is that (i think) I should then use the /usr/share/cleanpack folder instead of /usr/share/clean , which would have these consequences: - it will potentially break OS-Uninstaller and Clean-Ubiquity for all people using both applications at same time (which means several thousands of people using distros including these tools: Hybryde, Ubuntu Secured Remix, OS-Voyager...). Reason is that Boot-Repair allows to update its packages and librairies at start-up, but not the packages of Os-Uninstaller and Clean-Ubiquity. I can workaround this by allowing Boot-Repair to update also Os-Uninstaller and Clean-Ubiquity. - all users who have saved their MBR via Clean-Ubiquity won't be able to restore them simply any more, except if I add a big workaround which scans both /clean and /cleanpack folders - a short path is more convenient - it will require several changes in the code --> potential bugs / big loss of time - i would have to change all documents/posts on forum using this path that's why i would be very happy if i could keep the /usr/share/clean path ... > > Please do not use "Solves bug #636977" but the way documented in policy > so that the bug will be closed automatically on upload. > Is this ok ? * Initial release. (Closes: #636977) (i thought that was the uploader, not me, who had to modify the changelog before uploading) Regards Yann
