From: Stephen Frost (sfrost_at_snowman.net)
Date: Mon 27 Dec 2004 - 13:57:09 GMT
* Herbert Poetzl (herbert_at_13thfloor.at) wrote:
> | - How should the packaging devide up the groups most conveniently?
Good grief, Charlie Brown. That's a hell of alot of packages. The
0.30.195 i386 .deb that I did ended up being only 330k. I don't think
it's useful to split up util-vserver into this many packages on Debian,
in fact, I think it'd be a *terrible* idea. I'd say perhaps a main
util-vserver package and a -doc package. Maybe a -lib/-dev, but only if
something outside of util-vserver is expected to use the libraries/API
provided by util-vserver (do any actually exist?, is it even sane?).
> | - Very likely a shared lib package should be included only once if
> | there is more than one binary package.
> | * guest systems cannot run klogd (because there is only one kernel and
> | the klogd thus is best addressed in the host system).
> | So a distribution has to ship an empty dummy package to satisfy the
> | packages which depend on klogd (Debian: linux-kernel-log-daemon).
> hmm, this is a kernel issue, and maybe we can solve
> that at this level (by providing a fake or empty
> connection point for klogd) but IMHO it would be best
> to break up the syslog package into syslogd and klogd
> (which would render this point obsolete)
ehhh, I don't think util-vserver as a package should really care about
this all that much. People can install syslog-ng and use that instead
(that's what I do). A fake/empty connection point for klogd isn't all
that bad of an idea, imv, though.
> | * There is a number of compile warnings. Some of them sound
> | like they should be fixed. Are they ok as can be seen at:
> | http://backend.verfaction.de/~kk/util-vserver/buildlog_stderr.log
> probably heavily depends on the used compiler ...
Debian default currently would be gcc 3.3, or so.
Vserver mailing list