Hi Andreas, On Sep 21, 2014, at 5:21 PM, Andreas Tille <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Amul, > > On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 09:25:03AM -0400, Amul Shah wrote: >>> I do not see why it should be a goal to avoid postinst/prerm scripts. I >>> personally have not dealt with similar problems but if I would need to I >>> would have a look how openjdk, python or gcc are solving this issue. In >>> any case you can always consult [email protected] if you >>> might face problems to apply the technique used in these packages for >>> fis-gtm. >> [amul:8] Since V6.2-000 was just release, I'm skipping this feature for the >> V6.1-000 package. > > Sounds very reasonable. > >>> Multiarch is the way to go. >> [amul:8] I implemented this option. I was surprised by how little work was >> actually required. > > :-) > The tools are quite nifty. > >> [amul:8] Could you look over my work when you have some time. >> Everything works as I think it should, which means the work is only >> as good as I think. ;) I think that we are ready to upload V6.1-000. > > I uploaded after fixing some lintian overrides. Thanks for your work on > this package. [amul:9] Thanks for the fixes. I’ll read through to understand what I missed. > >> [amul:8] I hope to get the V6.2-000 packing done by the end of the >> month. I know this will result in overlapping packages, but I would >> very much like to have the work for V6.1-000 result in a package. > > I think it would be great to have V6.2-000 in the next 2-3 [amul:9] You should see the thread with V6.2-000 in the subject shortly. thanks, Amul -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: https://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
