Hi Dne Mon, 8 Dec 2008 22:29:15 +0100 Salvatore Bonaccorso <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> napsal(a):
> Yes I have to rephrase these sentences. The reason about that is the > following: upstream ships the "base filemanager" tuxcmd in a source > tarball, and in another tarball some modules (the above claimed, and I > should rephrase the description for tuxcmd itself). > For the modules I filled an separate ITP (see http://bugs.debian.org/508082). > The second I have to repackage the upstream tarball to remove the "non > free" module parts (unrar and libarchive plugin). What's non-free on libarchive? It's already packaged in main. I guess same applies to unrar (there is free unrar, but there is no free rar). > Then tuxcmd-modules > will "extend" tuxcmd by these additional modules. This second package > tuxcmd-modules I have not yet ready to upload to mentors.debian.net, > which then will extend the functionality of tuxcmd if installed. So > that is what I ment or wanted to say in the README.Debian, but I > should do better. > > "The tuxcmd package contains the base Tux Commander file manager. To > extend the functionality using some VFS modules available you need to > install the additional package tuxcmd-modules". Should explain the > situation better. Since english is not my native language I should > also post to the l10n-list, for checking the package description, for > having best possible description. > > Is this a good approach to this? Or do you think it's still better to > import also the "free" modules into the upstream source and repackage > the tarball? Just create new package with plugins (if some of them have excessive external dependencies, package them in separate binary modules) and make tuxcmd suggest/recommend tuxcmd-modules. -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
