Duncan Findlay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> As I understand the perl-policy, all packages that contain perl modules are
> to be named in the form libfoo-bar-perl.
>From my understanding, these are the perl equivalent of a shared
library. So the same rule should apply: Only package it seperately,
Duncan Findlay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> As I understand the perl-policy, all packages that contain perl modules are
> to be named in the form libfoo-bar-perl.
>From my understanding, these are the perl equivalent of a shared
library. So the same rule should apply: Only package it seperately
On Thu, Dec 06, 2001 at 07:37:33PM -0500, Duncan Findlay wrote:
> As I understand the perl-policy, all packages that contain perl modules are
> to be named in the form libfoo-bar-perl. I'm working on a program called
> SpamAssassin. While it contains perl modules, its primary purpose is for
> its
On Thu, Dec 06, 2001 at 07:37:33PM -0500, Duncan Findlay wrote:
> As I understand the perl-policy, all packages that contain perl modules are
> to be named in the form libfoo-bar-perl. I'm working on a program called
> SpamAssassin. While it contains perl modules, its primary purpose is for
> it
As I understand the perl-policy, all packages that contain perl modules are
to be named in the form libfoo-bar-perl. I'm working on a program called
SpamAssassin. While it contains perl modules, its primary purpose is for
its scripts. Furthermore, it contains one binary written in C, so it can't
As I understand the perl-policy, all packages that contain perl modules are
to be named in the form libfoo-bar-perl. I'm working on a program called
SpamAssassin. While it contains perl modules, its primary purpose is for
its scripts. Furthermore, it contains one binary written in C, so it can'
6 matches
Mail list logo
