Re: splitting package on arch-dependant and arch-independant parts

2005-06-15 Thread Bill Allombert
On Tue, Jun 14, 2005 at 09:39:09PM +0600, Sergey Fedoseev wrote:
 ?? ??, 14/06/2005 ?? 16:55 +0200, Bartosz Fenski aka fEnIo ??: 
  There's only one rule. Architecture dependent files go to binary package,
  and architecture independent to data package.
 
 I consider some common procedures should exist anyway. For example ones
 move manpage to binary package and others move it to data package. Who
 is right?

As a rule, put the manpage in the same package as the program it
document. Normally manpage are small enough there is no benefit to 
put them in the -data package, and it is more robust this way.

Cheers,
-- 
Bill. [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Imagine a large red swirl here.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]



splitting package on arch-dependant and arch-independant parts

2005-06-14 Thread Sergey Fedoseev
How exactly package should be splitted on data and binary parts? Which
files should be moved to binary package and which to the in data one?

Any standart procedures/recommendations/suggestions?
-- 
Sergey Fedoseev [EMAIL PROTECTED]


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: splitting package on arch-dependant and arch-independant parts

2005-06-14 Thread Bartosz Fenski aka fEnIo
On Tue, Jun 14, 2005 at 08:35:36PM +0600, Sergey Fedoseev wrote:
 How exactly package should be splitted on data and binary parts? Which
 files should be moved to binary package and which to the in data one?
 
 Any standart procedures/recommendations/suggestions?

There's only one rule. Architecture dependent files go to binary package,
and architecture independent to data package.

regards
fEnIo

-- 
  ,''`.  Bartosz Fenski | mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | pgp:0x13fefc40 | irc:fEnIo
 : :' :   32-050 Skawina - Glowackiego 3/15 - w. malopolskie - Poland
 `. `'   phone:+48602383548 | proud Debian maintainer and user
   `-  http://skawina.eu.org | jid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | rlu:172001


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Re: splitting package on arch-dependant and arch-independant parts

2005-06-14 Thread Sergey Fedoseev
 , 14/06/2005  16:55 +0200, Bartosz Fenski aka fEnIo : 
 There's only one rule. Architecture dependent files go to binary package,
 and architecture independent to data package.

I consider some common procedures should exist anyway. For example ones
move manpage to binary package and others move it to data package. Who
is right?
-- 
Sergey Fedoseev [EMAIL PROTECTED]


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: splitting package on arch-dependant and arch-independant parts

2005-06-14 Thread Bartosz Fenski aka fEnIo
On Tue, Jun 14, 2005 at 09:39:09PM +0600, Sergey Fedoseev wrote:
  There's only one rule. Architecture dependent files go to binary package,
  and architecture independent to data package.
 
 I consider some common procedures should exist anyway. For example ones
 move manpage to binary package and others move it to data package. Who
 is right?

Who moved binary (_architecture_ dependent binary) to -data package?
Basically you don't have to split package if there are no architecture
dependent data in it (or such data is very small).

Maybe you should tell us what program are you going to package.

regards
fEnIo



-- 
  ,''`.  Bartosz Fenski | mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | pgp:0x13fefc40 | irc:fEnIo
 : :' :   32-050 Skawina - Glowackiego 3/15 - w. malopolskie - Poland
 `. `'   phone:+48602383548 | proud Debian maintainer and user
   `-  http://skawina.eu.org | jid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | rlu:172001


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Re: splitting package on arch-dependant and arch-independant parts

2005-06-14 Thread Joerg Friedrich
Bartosz Fenski aka fEnIo schrieb am Dienstag, 14. Juni 2005 um 18:02:06 +0200:
 On Tue, Jun 14, 2005 at 09:39:09PM +0600, Sergey Fedoseev wrote:
   There's only one rule. Architecture dependent files go to binary package,
   and architecture independent to data package.
  
  I consider some common procedures should exist anyway. For example ones
  move manpage to binary package and others move it to data package. Who
  is right?
 
 Who moved binary (_architecture_ dependent binary) to -data package?

I think he's asking where to put the manpage to foo-bin or foo-data.



-- 
JFriedrich

There are only 10 types of people:
Those who understand binary and those who don't.


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature