On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 10:51:41PM +0200, Carsten Hey wrote: > On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 03:53:51PM +0200, Carsten Hey wrote: > > On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 10:10:17AM +0200, Christophe Lohr wrote: > > > Please find in attachment a first draft of such a wrapper. Is it what > > > you mean? > > > > Yes, this looks good. I would prefer to pass all option except possible > > popcon-nodependency ones to orphaner an let orphaner handle the rest, > > this would minimize future changes in popcon-nodependency, but there is > > no need to adapt this before the rest of the script is finished. Before > > calling orphaner can be added I need to add the required options to > > deborphan. > > I think it's time to think about how this feature should be implemented. > Christophe already provided a wrapper script missing the parts where he > needed to wait for me. He could finish it now if requested. > > Do you, popcon maintainers, prefer to add such a wrapper (not a fork as > originally planned by Christophe) around orphaner to your package or > should I try to merge his work into orphaner? As already said, I'd be > happy with both.
I think I would prefer if you include it in orphaner. Cheers, -- Bill. <ballo...@debian.org> Imagine a large red swirl here. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
