Hello, On Wednesday 17 February 2010 22:14:10, Frédéric Brière wrote: > This inserts the appropriate package name into the package's postinst, > instead of hard-coding module_name-dkms.
I'm against this patch. I was planning to write some "DKMS Policy" later tonight (together with an announcemente/call for testing of dh_dkms), and one of my points was "the package name must be $something-dkms". This is coherent with other teams in Debian: lib*-perl, python-*, lib*-cil, and so on. Even module-assistant-driven modules seem to have settled on *- source, but I admit I haven't checked this thoroughly. IMHO we can discuss whether it should be *-dkms or *-source-dkms, but I don't want people messing with package namespace. Giuseppe, what do you think? Kindly, David -- . ''`. Debian developer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 ----|---- `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Pkg-dkms-maint mailing list [email protected] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-dkms-maint
