Re: Q. about the way libc6 is packaged (looking for inspiration)

2000-10-13 Thread James Antill
Josip Rodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 03:26:17PM -0700, Yves Arrouye wrote: > > So I'm thinking about splitting into: > > > > libicu16: just the lib*.so.* > > icu: the rest, depends on libicu16. > > This is the correct way to do it. Doesn't this mean that you have

Re: Q. about the way libc6 is packaged (looking for inspiration)

2000-10-13 Thread Josip Rodin
On Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 03:26:17PM -0700, Yves Arrouye wrote: > So I'm thinking about splitting into: > > libicu16: just the lib*.so.* > icu: the rest, depends on libicu16. This is the correct way to do it. > How does libc6 sidestep the issue? Or will any libc7 be declared as > conflicting badly

Q. about the way libc6 is packaged (looking for inspiration)

2000-10-13 Thread Yves Arrouye
Hi, I started packaging ICU 1.6 the way libc6 is packaged, or similarly to: libicu16: contains all the lib*.so.*, plus some /usr/sbin/ tools, plus some converter data in /usr/share/icu/1.6.0.1/ But then I realized that when ICU 1.7 is released, I'll have: libicu17: contains all the lib*.so.

Re: Q. about the way libc6 is packaged (looking for inspiration)

2000-10-13 Thread Josip Rodin
On Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 03:26:17PM -0700, Yves Arrouye wrote: > So I'm thinking about splitting into: > > libicu16: just the lib*.so.* > icu: the rest, depends on libicu16. This is the correct way to do it. > How does libc6 sidestep the issue? Or will any libc7 be declared as > conflicting badl

Q. about the way libc6 is packaged (looking for inspiration)

2000-10-13 Thread Yves Arrouye
Hi, I started packaging ICU 1.6 the way libc6 is packaged, or similarly to: libicu16: contains all the lib*.so.*, plus some /usr/sbin/ tools, plus some converter data in /usr/share/icu/1.6.0.1/ But then I realized that when ICU 1.7 is released, I'll have: libicu17: contains all the lib*.so

Re: Is icu-1.7-0.pre.20001012 an okay version name?

2000-10-13 Thread Josip Rodin
On Thu, Oct 12, 2000 at 04:02:22PM -0700, Yves Arrouye wrote: > In my quest to figure out how to number a prerelease package for ICU that > will be upgraded by icu-1.7-1 (final release), I came up with names like: > > 1.7.0.pre.20001012 > > which work w/ dpkg version comparison but also mea

Re: Is icu-1.7-0.pre.20001012 an okay version name?

2000-10-13 Thread Josip Rodin
On Thu, Oct 12, 2000 at 04:02:22PM -0700, Yves Arrouye wrote: > In my quest to figure out how to number a prerelease package for ICU that > will be upgraded by icu-1.7-1 (final release), I came up with names like: > > 1.7.0.pre.20001012 > > which work w/ dpkg version comparison but also me

test package

2000-10-13 Thread Van Buggenhaut
Hi, I'm a DD to be. I build my first package yesterday, and it could help me a lot if someone would install it and tell me if it runs smoothly. The app is crafty, it's a powerful chess program. The .deb is available from my ftp site ftp://eric.ath/cx in /pub/debian. I also have a question : I

test package

2000-10-13 Thread Van Buggenhaut
Hi, I'm a DD to be. I build my first package yesterday, and it could help me a lot if someone would install it and tell me if it runs smoothly. The app is crafty, it's a powerful chess program. The .deb is available from my ftp site ftp://eric.ath/cx in /pub/debian. I also have a question : I