On Wed, 25 Mar 2009, Nils Rennebarth wrote:
Raphael Hertzog wrote:
On Tue, 24 Mar 2009, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
So I guess the request is that dpkg-deb doesn't complain about
X-* fields created with XB-X-* in debian/control.
That looks reasonable indeed. Should that be documented
On Tue, 24 Mar 2009, Jari Aalto wrote:
The right way to include a field in the .deb is to use
fields named XB-*. What doesn't work with such fields that would
require this patch ?
Let me put it this way:
Make the X-field default to mean the same as XB-field,
where field is
Raphael Hertzog wrote:
On Tue, 24 Mar 2009, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
So I guess the request is that dpkg-deb doesn't complain about
X-* fields created with XB-X-* in debian/control.
That looks reasonable indeed. Should that be documented somewhere ?
I'd suggest section 5.7 User-defined fields
Apparently noone objected to the wish itself.
The attached patch implements it. Could it be incorporated into the next dpkg?
--
Mit freundlichen Grüßen / with kind regards
Nils Rennebarth, Software Developer
--
Funkwerk IP-Appliances GmbH
Mönchhaldenstraße 28
D-70191 Stuttgart
Tel: +49 711
On Tue, 24 Mar 2009, Nils Rennebarth wrote:
Apparently noone objected to the wish itself.
Well, not all bugs have proper response/analysis due to the high number of
bugs that we handle. Sorry for that, it doesn't mean that every wishlist is
correct and makes sense.
The attached patch
On Tue, 24 Mar 2009, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
The attached patch implements it. Could it be incorporated into the next
dpkg?
Not until you have explained what this would be used for.
The right way to include a field in the .deb is to use
fields named XB-*. What doesn't work with such
Raphael Hertzog hert...@debian.org writes:
On Tue, 24 Mar 2009, Nils Rennebarth wrote:
Apparently noone objected to the wish itself.
Well, not all bugs have proper response/analysis due to the high number of
bugs that we handle. Sorry for that, it doesn't mean that every wishlist is
correct
7 matches
Mail list logo
