On Tue, Jun 14, 2005 at 09:39:09PM +0600, Sergey Fedoseev wrote:
> ?? ??, 14/06/2005 ?? 16:55 +0200, Bartosz Fenski aka fEnIo ??:
> > There's only one rule. Architecture dependent files go to binary package,
> > and architecture independent to data package.
>
> I consider some common
Bartosz Fenski aka fEnIo schrieb am Dienstag, 14. Juni 2005 um 18:02:06 +0200:
> On Tue, Jun 14, 2005 at 09:39:09PM +0600, Sergey Fedoseev wrote:
> > > There's only one rule. Architecture dependent files go to binary package,
> > > and architecture independent to data package.
> >
> > I consider s
On Tue, Jun 14, 2005 at 09:39:09PM +0600, Sergey Fedoseev wrote:
> > There's only one rule. Architecture dependent files go to binary package,
> > and architecture independent to data package.
>
> I consider some common procedures should exist anyway. For example ones
> move manpage to binary pack
В Втр, 14/06/2005 в 16:55 +0200, Bartosz Fenski aka fEnIo пишет:
> There's only one rule. Architecture dependent files go to binary package,
> and architecture independent to data package.
I consider some common procedures should exist anyway. For example ones
move manpage to binary package and o
On Tue, Jun 14, 2005 at 08:35:36PM +0600, Sergey Fedoseev wrote:
> How exactly package should be splitted on data and binary parts? Which
> files should be moved to binary package and which to the in data one?
>
> Any standart procedures/recommendations/suggestions?
There's only one rule. Archite
How exactly package should be splitted on data and binary parts? Which
files should be moved to binary package and which to the in data one?
Any standart procedures/recommendations/suggestions?
--
Sergey Fedoseev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject
6 matches
Mail list logo
