Yes, we try to keep things regularized around here, so XFree86 is the way that the package names need to be spelled.
Also, I request that you keep the XFree86-xserv package, as that will allow us to realize the immediate benefit of being able to release the Test-** server or updates to the stable server as small downloads that everyone can keep up to date with. Thanks for you great work, Harold > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Christopher Faylor > Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 1:35 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: xfree packages > > > On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 09:40:46PM -0700, Ian Burrell wrote: > >I finished making some xfree packages. They are distributed binary > >archives repackaged as cygwin packages. I made a package directory that > >can be used with setup.exe from a local directory and over the network. > > > >I changed my mind about the division of the packages I proposed. I got > >rid of the multiple doc and fonts packages cause I was having trouble > >with the naming and directories. Plus, I assumed the people would want > >to install them together. The packages are now: > > > >xfree-base > >xfree-devel > >xfree-docs > >xfree-fonts > >xfree-xfs > >xfree-xnest > >xfree-xvfb > >xfree-xprt > > > >I don't have a machine that people can easily download the full files > >from. I can post the setup.* files and scripts I used to build > the packages. > > Yes, please post the setup.hint files that you used. > > I think that these files should be called XFree86-base (or just > XFree86), etc. The project is the Cygwin/XFree86 project and I > think the package names should reflect that. > > cgf