[csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs drill, libldns1, libldnsdevel, libunb(...)

[İhsan Doğan]

Am 05.01.2011 21:16, schrieb Philip Brown:

>>> One possible path you might consider, is:
>>>  -  put the "drill" binary, along with the other utils like
>>> ldns-read-zone, in a "ldns" package.
>>>  - repackage an "empty" 'drill' package, that just depends on ldns
>>>  - 'ldns' depends on libldns1
>>>  - leave rest of packages as-is
>>
>> As far other packages are also packaged in the same way, I don't see any
>> reason why ldns can't be packaged in this way.
> 
> What, you mean like jpeg?
> 
> or tiff?
> 
> :-)
> 
> Here's a reason for you to consider:
> putting "libldns" into google, comes up with debian packages as first
> hit. Whereas googling "ldns" comes up with the proper site.

Searching for libldns with Google shows, that Debian is doing exactly
the same. --> http://packages.debian.org/lenny/libldns1

> So keying things more to "ldns" instead of "libldns" (with the
> exception of the actual shared libraries package) seems like the
> better thing for us to have the catalog names based on.

According to http://wiki.opencsw.org/packaging-shared-libraries , the
package name is absolutely appropriate.

> Sorry to say also, even if we were to agree on your slant of naming,
> you should repackage a little anyway:  our devel packages all use
> _devel, not "devel" recently. so libldnsdevel sticks out rather badly

Ok, this is indeed a mistake. I'm going to fix that one.



Ihsan

-- 
ihsan at dogan.ch        http://blog.dogan.ch/