-------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: RFD: translated description with dpkg Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2001 00:28:10 -0700 (PDT) Resent-From: [email protected] Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2001 03:26:25 -0400 From: Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Debian Liste (Dev)" <[email protected]>,[email protected] References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On Wed, Aug 29, 2001 at 03:19:23PM -0500, Steve Greenland wrote: > On 29-Aug-01, 12:18 (CDT), Wichert Akkerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Previously Steve Greenland wrote: > > > I also think the standalone .deb argument is pretty bogus. > > > > I disagree. A standalone .deb should never be less useful to people then > > one that is in some archive. > > How is it less useful? > > A standalone .deb w/o a Package file doesn't integrate into apt or > dselect, so there's no where to show the descriptions. The only reason > one would have an interest in such a .deb is that one already has a > pretty good idea of what it is, presumably from an accompaning README, > or the webpage with a link, or somesuch. I doubt very many people go > around browsing random .debs with 'dpkg-deb -I'. Who's to say that a more featureful frontend won't be able to deal with individual .debs just as elegantly? In the webpage-download scenario, I imagine it's pretty common for users to find software on pages that are (entirely or partially) not in their native language, and in that situation a translated description could be quite useful. -- - mdz -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] seems useful to me...i've had problems using dselect after installing .deb files not from a debian mirror...g.b...
