Re: [wmii] Re: wmii 2.2 packages in Debian ready for an upgrade?

From: Anselm R. Garbe <>
Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 20:46:07 +0100

On Sat, Jan 21, 2006 at 08:09:23PM +0100, Daniel Baumann wrote:
> As a service, provides backports from testing/unstable
> packages in a half-officially mannor. That is where I will upload it as
> soon as it enters unstable ( does only backport official
> (as in accepted) Debian packages), just as I did it with wmii before.
> Point your Debian stable users to

I see.

> By including rc into wmii package, I ment to just put the binary into
> the wmii binary package itselfs (and omit therefore all other 9base
> tools completely).

The problem which could occure in this scenario is, that if
there are scripts provided by various users, they might fail in
Debian, because sed/grep has a different (in my opinion cleaner)
syntax beside other things. And with the complete 9base
dependency no one must care if the scripts are used under
Debian/BSD/SunOS/whatever, because they will behave the same
among all systems.

> > This is also because we plan to depend on mk from
> > 9base in the future, to get rid of the nasty incompliances among
> > different make implementations (GNU, BSD, Sun, whatever).
> dooh.. and in a year, you shipp your own kernel? *kidding*

Heh, not really. But as far as I know, there exist even BSD
userland packages for Debian, so having an Plan 9 userland
package seems straight-forward in my eyes.

Also, wmii is not the last Plan9ish project we push forward.
There are upcoming projects already in the Queue related and
based to wmii and 9base, esp. the editor improved project, which
will depend on liblitz, libixp2 and 9base as well, beside a
libixp2ized ii, a liblitz based mh frontend, etc. Thus having
9base in mainstream distributions will make things easier later.
Even portions of plan9port like separate rio or acme packages
could be made based on 9base.

> > If there are any good reasons to modify the structure of 9base
> > to get better acceptance due packaging it, let me know.
> It is acceptable, but I and others really doubt the usefullnes of having
> a bunch of coreutils-alternatives as depends just for a window manager.

I'd agree if all would use Debian. But unfortunately this is not
the case. ;)


 Anselm R. Garbe  ><><  ><><  GPG key: 0D73F361
Received on Sat Jan 21 2006 - 20:46:08 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Sun Jul 13 2008 - 15:59:47 UTC