Re: ppp & ppp-pam

1997-12-21 Thread Christian Schwarz
On Thu, 18 Dec 1997, Philip Hands wrote: > > Philip Hands <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > Recommends: ppp-pam > > > > Recommends is for packages "found together in all but unusual > > sitations". > > > > It's certainly not appropriate here. I wouldn't even use Suggests. > > Just mention

Re: ppp & ppp-pam

1997-12-18 Thread Michael Alan Dorman
Philip Hands <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Is there an automatic way of setting the current version of a package into > the > Depends (a la ${shlibs:Depends}) ? Not totally automatic, but you could probably do something in debian/rules to sed (or, if you're me, perl) it out of the changelog, and

Re: ppp & ppp-pam

1997-12-18 Thread Philip Hands
> Philip Hands <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Recommends: ppp-pam > > Recommends is for packages "found together in all but unusual > sitations". > > It's certainly not appropriate here. I wouldn't even use Suggests. > Just mention it in the description. I've gone for Suggests in the packa

Re: ppp & ppp-pam

1997-12-18 Thread Guy Maor
Philip Hands <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Recommends: ppp-pam Recommends is for packages "found together in all but unusual sitations". It's certainly not appropriate here. I wouldn't even use Suggests. Just mention it in the description. Guy -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-ma

Re: ppp & ppp-pam

1997-12-18 Thread Hamish Moffatt
On Thu, Dec 18, 1997 at 12:17:43AM +, Philip Hands wrote: > This being the case I thought I'd produce two packages, ppp & ppp-pam. > > ppp will contain the current setup, compiled without PAM support, and ppp-pam > will contain just /usr/bin/pppd, and have preinst/postr

ppp & ppp-pam

1997-12-18 Thread Philip Hands
Hi, It seems that the only file that needs to be changed between ppp with PAM, and ppp without PAM is /usr/bin/pppd itself. This being the case I thought I'd produce two packages, ppp & ppp-pam. ppp will contain the current setup, compiled without PAM support, and ppp-pam will con