On Tue, Mar 21, 2006 at 05:54:09PM -0400, Felipe Sateler wrote: > Done some work, now I might be ready. > > Justin Pryzby wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 10, 2006 at 05:35:15PM -0300, Felipe Sateler wrote: > >> contact Matt, but so far I haven't received any response (mail was sent > >> on 11/01/06). I do know I have to file an ITA bug to each package, but I > > In the case of installwatch, you should retitle the 'O'rphan bug > > instead: http://packages.qa.debian.org/installwatch => #347469 > > > What you want to happen, is that anyone who has either of installwatch > > or checkinstall now, ends up with the new version of whatever the new > > packagename will be. Do it by setting > > > > Package: foo > > Replaces: bar > > Conflicts: bar > > > > The overloaded combination of Conflicts+Replaces means "this is the > > new name for package bar", so it will cause files in bar but not foo > > to be removed. > Done this too. However, I can't install it via dpkg, only through apt. dpkg > argues that it can't uninstall installwatch because checkinstall needs it. But checkinstall doesn't need it, right? You should probably drop that Depends .. You want to have Replaces+Conflicts, though. You probably also want to add Provides, or a dummy package with the name of the old Debian package which is now included in the new package, to force the new package to be installed.
> > You might consider requesting uploads as an NMUs initially, though if > > it were a QA-owned package this would be a "QA upload" rather than an > > NMU. > Ok, I'll do that when I'm ready. However, I've got a new question. Package > directories (such as /usr/doc/<package> /usr/doc/ is now a policy violation; documentation must live in /usr/share/doc/. > or /usr/lib/<package>) are to be > named after the Debian package or the real package? Note that although > checkinstall and installwatch come together, they are still two separate > packages (one includes the other). So the question really is: documentation > for _both_ installwatch and checkinstall go > into /usr/share/doc/checkinstall, or I make a new > directory /usr/share/installwatch? The installwatch library (which is not > intended to be shared) goes into /usr/lib/installwatch > or /usr/lib/checkinstall? So far, I've favored Debian package names. That makes sense to me too; /usr/share/installwatch smells like namespace polution, and asks for confusion if not collision someday. Justin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
