Drew Parsons wrote: > > > I would therefore like to take his standalone xprint code and package it for > > > Debian. Any suggestions for naming? xprint or xprt-x11 or ...?? > > > > I suggest xprint-xorg for the source package. For the binary package I > > recommend a down-cased version of the server executable's name. > > > ... > > What is the name of the server binary that X.Org's xprint builds? You > > may need to C/R/P the xprt package. > > The binary is called Xprt, same as XFree86's (they are, after all, the "same" > thing ;)) I've got Roland's binary sitting in /usr/local/bin for the time > being. So I'd probably use xprt-xorg for the binary, consistent with > xprint-xorg for the source package.
The name "xprint-xorg" may be slighly misleading since it is not based on the plain X.org source; I am using a tree based on the X.org tarballs with tons of my own patches to get the little monster working... What about "xprint-xprintorg" ? :) > > I imagine that when X.Org's xprint finally does trickle down into > > XFree86, I might want to rename my xprt package to xprint; certainly if > > the binary has changed its name, but this might also leave you free to > > package further developments in Xprint. This would be similar to how > > Mesa is a separate software project from XFree86, and yet it also > > incorporated into the latter. Thus my package is called "xlibmesa3", > > for instance. > > > > I'm happy to work with you on ensuring that my XFree86 packages and your > > xprint package(s) coexist, or at least get each other out of the way > > gracefully. :) > > Great :) Since the binaries have the same name, seems to me the best and > fairest thing is probably to rename both binaries, Eeeekks... > say Xprt-xfree86 and > Xprt-xorg, and use alternatives to select which one will be Xprt. Mhhh, do yuo mean that you want to make /usr/X11R6/bin/Xprt a softlink to the real binary ? That may be a solution... ...but to be honestly... having the a broken Xprt binary around screams for trouble... I do not feel good with having two binaries around - one working, one broken... > What do > you think? Alternatively, we could just have xprt-xorg replace xprt, as you > suggested above. That may be the better solution for now since the Xfree86 Xprt binary has more than one issue which renders it completely unuseable... ;-( We can always switch back to the Xfree86 source tree when the fixes I am going to contribute to X.org have been ported to the single vendor trees (which includes Xfree86.org's tree). > I'm anticipating that at some point the XFree86 version will > start working, and you might want to try both at the same time (they can in > fact both run at the same time, listening to different displays). Yes, but I assume it will take - at least - another six months before we can expect fixed versions from Xfree86's code base... > I think the assumption should be that XFree86 will eventually fix up its own > Xprint server, in which case the X.Org version won't be "required". That is > to say, you could continue to name the XFree86 version in a way that > identifies it as Debian's default. But I'm not sure about that, since I > suppose we could always assume Roland's X.Org version will always be > advanced ahead of the XFree86 version. :) > Roland, is it fair to identify your version as the "X.Org" version, in > contrast to Xfree86's version? Or would you prefer a different nomenclature, > given that your one hasn't necessarily been accepted yet into offical X.Org > sources? See my comment above; the name "X.org" does not match perfectly here (which reminds me that my Xprt version identifies itself still with "X.org" when you query it with xdpyinfo...xx@@!!!... ;-( ) ... something like "Xprint.org" fits better in here... :) ---- Bye, Roland -- __ . . __ (o.\ \/ /.o) [EMAIL PROTECTED] \__\/\/__/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] /O /==\ O\ MPEG specialist, C&&JAVA&&Sun&&Unix programmer (;O/ \/ \O;) TEL +49 641 99-41370 FAX +49 641 99-41359 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
