In article [EMAIL PROTECTED] you wrote:
: BTW: Do you know anybody who really needs to put all the tools needed
: to build source packages onto floppies? :-)
Yes, I do. A friend has an older laptop that has a floppy drive, and that's
his only current path of getting bits in and out. He may
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Manoj Srivastava) wrote on 13.05.97 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Or, thirdly, we use pristine sources iff they are in supported
formats, or else the upstream source is massaged into a supported
format, and BIG signs are posted pointing to the real sources and the
steps
On May 12, Jim Pick wrote
Excellent write-up, Klee. Thanks for doing it.
I second this; a lot of thought has obviously gone into this, and it
shows!
Since I've been attacking this topic lately, I'll try to post some (hopefully)
constructive criticisms. But, overall, I agree with what you
Please clarify - unpacking a Debian source package is different
than unpacking an upstream source package (which may require tar,
unzip, zoo, lha, jar, etc.). Right?
Andy Mortimer wrote:
Personally, I'd be inclined to disagree here, especially given [1.5]
below. If I've gone to all the
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Andy Mortimer) wrote on 13.05.97 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On May 12, Jim Pick wrote
Excellent write-up, Klee. Thanks for doing it.
I second this; a lot of thought has obviously gone into this, and it
shows!
aol Me too! /aol
* [1.1] It must be possible to
How about where part of the upstream archive could go into the main
distribution, but part needs to go into non-free or non-US, even for the
sources?
That's a case where you _must_ repack the original archive.
MfG Kai
No. I'd just say upload the upstream sources to the non-US
Hi,
Jim == Jim Pick [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Might it be possible to, say, have a list of `supported formats' --
.tar.gz, .zip, others? -- and at least give the option of
downloading upstream sources which were originally in other formats
as a tarball? This is far from ideal, for any number
7 matches
Mail list logo
