On Wed, 3 Feb 1999, Sudhakar Chandrasekharan wrote: > Thanks for all the help guys. I am now packaging aspell into aspell.deb, > aspell-dev.deb and aspell-doc.deb Should all of them go into the same > section (text)? Or should each of them go into seperate sections (aspell = > text, aspell-dev = devel, aspell-doc = doc)? Different packages seem to do > different things about this. enlightenment-doc, for example, is in section > x11. postgresql-doc is in section doc while postgresql is in section misc. >
I think this is because developers often don't know how to get binary packages created from the same source to go into different sections--at least that was my excuse :-) As a user I find this damn annoying. What is the point of having sections if things are going to end up anywhere anyway? The way to do it is to add a section: line to each paragraph of debian/control listing the proper section. > Also, here is how I see the dependancies between the various pcakages - > > Package Dependencies > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > aspell suggests aspell-doc > aspell-doc depends aspell IMO depends is too strong. If the documentation is essential to use the program, it should be in the aspell package. The doc package should be for "extra" (more complete, different format etc.) documentation. Make it suggests instead. Although it's unlikely someone may want to read the documentation without installing the package. > aspell-dev suggests aspell-doc and aspell > -- Jaldhar H. Vyas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
