Enrico Zini dixit: >On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 03:13:25PM +0000, Thorsten Glaser wrote: > >Thanks for the suggestions. Let's have a look: > >> suite::bsd > >Can you name about 7 packages that would use this?
mksh, quota stuff, openntpd, libbsd, libbsd-arc4random-perl, all of the GNU/kFreeBSD tools, am-utils, bsd-mailx, bsdcpio, bsdgames, bsdgames-nonfree, bsdmainutils, bsdtar, bsdutils, csh, cups-bsd, cupsys-bsd, dump, fwbuilder-bsd, heirloom-mailx == nail (?), isakmpd, libamu*, libedit*, lpr, netcat-openbsd, nvi, nvi-doc, openbsd-inetd, pmake >> use::scripting or something similar (for shell, perl, python, php, etc.) > >The way I see it, something like a shell or python doesn't have to have >a use: that is, you can use them for pretty much any purpose. Hm at the moment I have use::login, if so I'd have to remove that. Wouldn't it be better to include as many uses as possible? >We are talking, that is, as the main user's goal for the software. Okay. >> works-with::software:scripts (for interpreters, obfuscators, etc.) > >You can use works-with::software:source for that. Hmm, vague but okay. >> devel::lang:shell (for dash, bash, ksh, pdksh, mksh, zsh, but NOT csh/tcsh) >> maybe you've got to add devel::lang:csh too though ;) dunno about heirloom-sh > >This one's difficult: there are many shells, but every shell has some >scripting differences, which makes me worry whether "devel::lang:shell" >would mean anything at all for practical purposes. Superset of POSIX and somewhat compatible to it? Maybe include Bourne (heirloom-sh). bye, //mirabilos -- Sometimes they [people] care too much: pretty printers [and syntax highligh- ting, d.A.] mechanically produce pretty output that accentuates irrelevant detail in the program, which is as sensible as putting all the prepositions in English text in bold font. -- Rob Pike in "Notes on Programming in C" _______________________________________________ Debtags-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/debtags-devel
