On Thu, 30 Apr 1998, Raul Miller wrote:
> Dale Scheetz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I agree with Ian. The .deb file format is expressly for the distribution
> > of configured executables (binaries for short). Using this format for
> > source distribution is simply asking for trouble.
>
> Um... so does this mean we have to retract the kernel-source packages?
Wouldn't hurt my feelings any to have the kernel source packaged just like
every other package, so a dpkg-buildpackage on the Debian source tree
would build a kernel binary package, just like the one found on the boot
disks.
I'm not the kernel maintainer, so I have little to say about how that gets
done.
>
> Also, note that a variety of other packages include source, examples
> include: samba, ipx, modutils, netcat, xephem, ncurses3.4, mgetty,
> freetype1, cgilib.
>
Which has absolutely nothing to do with this discusion. You could just as
well say that scripts are also delivered in this way, and they are source
as well.
What we are talking about here is "repackaging" the source tree into a
.deb file. Very undesirable as it defeats all the good points of the
current source package system.
Luck,
Dwarf
--
_-_-_-_-_- Author of "The Debian Linux User's Guide" _-_-_-_-_-_-
aka Dale Scheetz Phone: 1 (850) 656-9769
Flexible Software 11000 McCrackin Road
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tallahassee, FL 32308
_-_-_-_-_-_- If you don't see what you want, just ask _-_-_-_-_-_-_-
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
