On Thu, Dec 04, 2003 at 02:10:42PM +0100, Mattia Dongili wrote: > 1- the upstream package contains also 2 extra utilities to enable > runtime configuration of the driver (synclient and syndaemon). I'd > package them separately and Recommend the utilities from the driver > package. Is it the correct approach?
Either Recommands or Suggests would be probably be correct. The line between the two is fairly subjective. > Any suggestion about the name? xfree86-driver-synaptics-utils, maybe? Kind of long and ugly, but highly consistent with its counterpart. > 2- the source package needs some X headers not included in xlibs-dev > [2]. Such headers are included in mainstream package, they are X4.2 > headers but mainstream says they are ok for X4.3 also. I'd set build > dependency on xlibs-dev and compile against its headers, instead of the > included ones. I'll still compile against the mainstream included > headers for the remaining ones. I don't understand. You seem to be saying that the headers you need are not in the package, but also are in the package. "the source package needs some X headers not included in xlibs-dev" and "I'd set build dependency on xlibs-dev and compile against its headers" Also, what do you mean by "mainstream package"? > Another option could be to create another xfree86-driver-dev to let > external drivers compile. Which solution? I think the headers in question will probably end up in the xfree86-driver-ddk package, which is slated for development after 4.3.0-1 is released. -- G. Branden Robinson | Arguments, like men, are often Debian GNU/Linux | pretenders. [EMAIL PROTECTED] | -- Plato http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
