David Paleino <[email protected]> wrote:
> 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,
The anal-retentive part of me is glad to hear this, but I'm not aware of
any dh_* tool failing due to a choice of package name. Enforcing a
naming policy seems to be the job of lintian, not debhelper.
In any case, if you choose to go down that route, please make sure that
dh_dkms throws an error instead of generating an invalid postinst.
> and so on. Even module-assistant-driven modules seem to have settled on *-
> source, but I admit I haven't checked this thoroughly.
Mostly, but there's still some *-modules-source, *-module-source and
*-src in there. (I wrote a kernel module class for CDBS, so I should
know. <g>)
--
Debian is the Jedi operating system: "Always two there are, a master and
an apprentice".
-- Simon Richter on debian-devel
_______________________________________________
Pkg-dkms-maint mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-dkms-maint
