Corinna Vinschen wrote: > On Jul 1 09:01, Dean Scarff wrote: >> Upstream release. >> >> Built for cygwin 1.7. >> >> There are a couple of relevant packaging conventions that I've noticed >> discussed on this list and in practice that contradict >> http://cygwin.com/setup.html yet haven't had an official response (at >> least I can't find it in the archives). >> >> - should setup.hint have requires: cygwin? nasm's does.
No, that's now an obsolete practice, it should be removed. See e.g.: http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin-apps/2009-06/msg00145.html >> - should it be /usr/share/doc/nasm or /usr/share/doc/nasm-2.06? nasm's >> is the former > > Every package seems to have its own idea how to name the doc dir. It's > not *that* important. I guess the better approach is to omit the > version. After all, you usually have just one of the packages installed > and the user doesn't exactly care for the actual version of the package > when looking for the docs. Omitting the version number is the new convention; see the thread: "[RFC] 1.7 Packaging: Documentation": http://www.cygwin.com/ml/cygwin-apps/2008-08/threads.html#00081 cheers, DaveK
