On Tue, 2002-04-16 at 03:46, David Douthitt wrote: > On 4/14/02 at 11:20 AM, Mike Noyes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > David outlines a package description file in his > > "Developing for LRP" guide. The format follows. <snip> > > I propose the following changes: > > Comments follow... > > > use program name instead of package name, > > Thought those were supposed to be (close) to the same? Probably the > actual name of the binary or program should be used.
David, I think we should use the program's name, or place it in what RedHat calls "Summary". Personally I prefer the deb format, but it doesn't include summary/program name information. :-( Program: Ultimate Packer for eXecutables = RPM Summary = DEB N/A Executable: upx = RPM Name = DEB Package Package: upx.lrp = RPM N/A = DEB Filename Debian packages provide the following information (apt-cache show): Package, Version, Priority, Section, Maintainer, Depends, Suggests, Conflicts, Provides, Replaces, Architecture, Filename, Size, MD5sum, Description, installed-size. RedHat rpms have this summary information (rpm -q -i): Name, Version, Release, Install date, Group, Size, URL, Summary, Description, Relocations, Vendor, Build Date, Build Host, Source RPM, License Does anyone know what information is provided by Debian udeb or Midori packages? <snip> > > remove "Keywords", "Release", and "Group". > > Bad idea. > > Keywords allow basic searches: > > cd /var/lib/lrpkg > grep -li "^Keywords: .*keyword*" | sed 's/.desc$//' > > Release allows you to separate releases from versions. > > Group is one of the best reasons for *.desc: what category IS this > package - allows nice creation of FTP repositories. Who determines what keywords and categories apply to each package? I believe these tags will cause confusion if there is no set categorization template. > > Name: Ultimate Packer for eXecutables > > Ouch! That's neither a program name nor a package name. The program > is "upx" In my opinion that is the program name, while upx is the executable name (see example above). > > Version: 1.20-1 > > upx is not version 1.20-1 but version 1.20 (at least in this example). In your example, why did you indicate a release level of 1? Is the release level different than the hyphen would indicate? -- Mike Noyes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://sourceforge.net/users/mhnoyes/ http://leaf-project.org/ _______________________________________________ Leaf-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel
