On Fri, Aug 06, 1999 at 11:59:38AM +0200, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: > The current Policy manual says almost nothing about the README.Debian file. I > suggest to add a section 6.8 (in the "Documentation" chapter) or something > like that: > > 6.8 README.Debian
Something to this effect should definitely be added. It might even be worth mentioning that a "TODO.Debian" can be helpful too. So on the presumption I can second this with a mild difference of opinion, I'd like to do that. > Your package may contain a /usr/share/doc/package/README.Debian file. It is > mandatory to have one if you modified the source code of the upstream package. I'd prefer to just say it should document these changes, rather than make it mandatory. :-/ > - the rationale for choosing such or such options in the debian/rules when > calling configure and/or make. Why shouldn't this simply be in the debian/rules file where it's convenient, both to change when you change the configure and/or make options, and to read when you notice someone's setting weird options in the rules file? > - the Debian packages you need to recompile this package. The Debian > packaging > system does not know about formal source dependencies. Therefore, if the > source of a package does not compile, the user has to guess what you need. It > is better to tell it explicitely. There's an existing proposal to have proper build dependencies, so this is hopefully redundant. Cheers, aj -- Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/> I don't speak for anyone save myself. PGP encrypted mail preferred. ``The thing is: trying to be too generic is EVIL. It's stupid, it results in slower code, and it results in more bugs.'' -- Linus Torvalds
pgp9FHW7jebIq.pgp
Description: PGP signature
