Re: [Slackbuilds-users] Supplementary manpages
On 16/07/2010 13:17, Audrius Kažukauskas wrote: On Thu, 2010-07-15 at 16:34:34 +0100, Pierre Cazenave wrote: I've written a SlackBuild for OCROpus which builds fine given a couple of Debian patches. When I was getting those patches, I noticed Debian have created a manpage for OCROpus as there isn't one included by default. Would including this in the SlackBuild submission as a separate file be OK? Would it be treated like a patch (i.e. incorporated in the submitted build) or should I link to it as another download? Or, should I just omit it altogether and leave the package as upstream released it: manpageless? Running find . -type f -name '*.[1-9]' on my local git clone of SBo shows quite a few SlackBuilds which have man pages as the separate files added. So, yes, it's a good idea to provide a man page. One example might be unrar; I suggest checking it and doing the same for OCROpus. ___ SlackBuilds-users mailing list SlackBuilds-users@slackbuilds.org http://lists.slackbuilds.org/mailman/listinfo/slackbuilds-users Archives - http://lists.slackbuilds.org/pipermail/slackbuilds-users/ FAQ - http://slackbuilds.org/faq/ Ah, I didn't think to check existing submissions. Well, if it's been done before, then I'll just go ahead and submit it all in one bundle. Thanks for the input, Pierre ___ SlackBuilds-users mailing list SlackBuilds-users@slackbuilds.org http://lists.slackbuilds.org/mailman/listinfo/slackbuilds-users Archives - http://lists.slackbuilds.org/pipermail/slackbuilds-users/ FAQ - http://slackbuilds.org/faq/
Re: [Slackbuilds-users] Supplementary manpages
On Thu, 2010-07-15 at 16:34:34 +0100, Pierre Cazenave wrote: > I've written a SlackBuild for OCROpus which builds fine given a > couple of Debian patches. When I was getting those patches, I > noticed Debian have created a manpage for OCROpus as there isn't one > included by default. > > Would including this in the SlackBuild submission as a separate file > be OK? Would it be treated like a patch (i.e. incorporated in the > submitted build) or should I link to it as another download? Or, > should I just omit it altogether and leave the package as upstream > released it: manpageless? Running find . -type f -name '*.[1-9]' on my local git clone of SBo shows quite a few SlackBuilds which have man pages as the separate files added. So, yes, it's a good idea to provide a man page. One example might be unrar; I suggest checking it and doing the same for OCROpus. -- Audrius Kažukauskas pgpyvHg6SvmQy.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ SlackBuilds-users mailing list SlackBuilds-users@slackbuilds.org http://lists.slackbuilds.org/mailman/listinfo/slackbuilds-users Archives - http://lists.slackbuilds.org/pipermail/slackbuilds-users/ FAQ - http://slackbuilds.org/faq/
[Slackbuilds-users] Supplementary manpages
I've written a SlackBuild for OCROpus which builds fine given a couple of Debian patches. When I was getting those patches, I noticed Debian have created a manpage for OCROpus as there isn't one included by default. Would including this in the SlackBuild submission as a separate file be OK? Would it be treated like a patch (i.e. incorporated in the submitted build) or should I link to it as another download? Or, should I just omit it altogether and leave the package as upstream released it: manpageless? Thoughts welcome, Pierre ___ SlackBuilds-users mailing list SlackBuilds-users@slackbuilds.org http://lists.slackbuilds.org/mailman/listinfo/slackbuilds-users Archives - http://lists.slackbuilds.org/pipermail/slackbuilds-users/ FAQ - http://slackbuilds.org/faq/
