Hi Gert,
On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 02:35:28AM +0100, Gert Wollny wrote:
> > I guess candidates would be mia2-bin for imaging and libmia-2.0-dev for
> > imaging-dev right?
> Yes.
>
> > From my personal taste I would prefer mia2-tools or
> > even mia-tools (I personally do not see a need to duplicate the version
> > number in the package name - but perhaps there is some good reason for
> > it). I just have the feeling that '-bin' is quite rarely used and
> > '-tools' is somehow common for tools using the library features.
> I'll change this thirst thing on Monday, there was also no real reason
> to use the version number, i.e. I will remove it.
OK, this did not yet changed - so I'm waiting for your confirmation.
Besides this I do not see any issues with the packaging and I think I
will upload if you are finished with the renaming (or simply decide that
your original names are fine - I was just giving you a hint for
consideration of names that are usual, i.e. if you insist on your
original names this would be fine as well.)
> other words, it could be we have another version conflict like with
> pristine-tar before. I used git-buildpackage version 0.6.0~git20121124.
Sorry, my fault! I was trying the build on a machine with old
pristine-tar. It now worked (with both - the old clone and your new
Git repository.) Sorry for the confusion and simply assume that the
problem can be perfectly on my end. :-)
Kind regards
Andreas.
--
http://fam-tille.de
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-med-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20121217081820.gc21...@an3as.eu
