On Mon, Jan 15, 2001 at 01:01:48AM +0000, Colin Watson wrote: > 5.8 Programs for the X Window System > > Programs that may be configured with support for the X Window System > must be configured to do so and must declare any package dependencies > necessary to satisfy their runtime requirements when using the X > Window System, unless the package in question is of standard or higher > priority, in which case X-specific binaries may be split into a > separate package, or alternative versions of the package with X > support may be provided. > <SNIP> > * No X-less binary may be provided. > * An X-less binary may be provided, but it must go into a package with > one of the X-dependent front ends. Thus, either an arbitrary > X-dependent front end must be picked to accompany it (which would be > odd, I think), or else all the front ends must go into the one > package (including emacs, which is a pretty vast wodge of > dependencies for a humble talk client). > > Is the intent really to forbid multiple front ends to programs like > gnutalk from being split into separate packages? <SNIP>
I'm no expert, but check the vim package collection by Wichert Akkerman. From that and other packages with similar multiple choices, I would say if they are small, lump them together if possible. If they conflict (only one at a time makes sense), then separate them but build all/most from same source if at all possible. Gordon Sadler
