On Fri, Jan 07, 2005 at 12:40:35PM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote: >On Jan 7 01:28, Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes wrote: >> Right now I'm looking at the debian packages instead: >> http://packages.debian.org/unstable/source/fortune-mod >> http://packages.debian.org/unstable/source/fortunes-bofh-excuses >> >> which generate 5 packages: fortune-mod (the binaries), >> fortunes-min, fortunes, fortunes-off, and fortunes-bofh-excuses. >> >> If these look ok to me, do you see any problem with using them instead? >> (There are also a lot of non-English data files packages that I'm not >> going to mess with at the moment.) > >Personally I'd rather see only one fortune package. Using the -o >plus rot13 technique should really do it.
FWIW, if you are planning on maintaining the package I would just defer to your judgement on whatever you think is best. Just, whatever you do, remember the children. cgf -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
