> > Are you still trying to maintain the Debian xmlstarlet package? There > > are currently a number of very old bugs that are very important that > > have been ignored for over a year. > > Thanks for reminding me, I'm working on the package now. > Unfortunately, the patch for bug #312932 induces another policy > violation: the 'xml' command then does not have a manual page; so it > will still be called 'xmlstarlet', despite what the built-in help says. > I will however do my best to fix the non-i386 naming problem before I > consider it done.
Awesome. :-) I need to call xmlstarlet from within debian/rules, and it is thus important that the binary have the same name on any architecture. I personally think that xmlstarlet is a more descriptive binary name anyway, so I'm glad to hear that you will settle with that. I look forward do seeing a new release. Thanks for your work on this. Charles -- Life is sweet But oh how bitter! To love a gal And then Not git 'er Burma-Shave http://burma-shave.org/jingles/1941/life_is_sweet
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
