From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Wed, 27 May 2015 15:43:18 +0200 From: Gilles Chanteperdrix Message-ID: <20150527134318.GU27570@hermes.click-hack.org> References: <20150527111126.2f03fa66@md1em3qc> <55658C9D.8020406@xenomai.org> <20150527130931.27f37fcb@md1em3qc> <5565AF40.3070502@xenomai.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5565AF40.3070502@xenomai.org> Subject: Re: [Xenomai] [PATCH] debian: remove xeno-config from libxenomai-dev package List-Id: Discussions about the Xenomai project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Philippe Gerum Cc: xenomai@xenomai.org On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 01:49:20PM +0200, Philippe Gerum wrote: > On 05/27/2015 01:09 PM, Henning Schild wrote: > > On Wed, 27 May 2015 11:21:33 +0200 > > Philippe Gerum wrote: > > > >> You mean this? > >> > >> http://git.xenomai.org/xenomai-3.git/commit/?id=571ec165ad6a22d3f93f6197b64eb8edba8fbee4 > > > > Ahh. Yes i meant this. The actual conclusion of the discussion to this > > patch was to revert the change that introduced the problem and not > > apply my patch. But for me either way is fine. > > > > Actually, the right approach is to move xeno-config to the base package, > since it now delivers information about the runtime system as well. > > > I also referred to another change i suggested and am still waiting for > > feedback: > > https://xenomai.org/pipermail/xenomai/2015-April/034105.html > > > > Looks ok. I'll pick that one unless Gilles pulls the break for any > debian-specific issue. No, that is fine by me. As of 2014, I have stopped being a Debian user (after being one for 17 years), so, I care less and less about it, I have reached a point where everything about this distribution seems over-designed, gets in the way on the desktop of someone who mainly does software development, and paradoxically lead to bad quality software. In any case, I am no longer running Debian on my desktop, and restarting a server to test a Xenomai release is out of the question, so it would not be easy for me to test Debian packaging. Since we do not really have a Debian maintainer (and we never did really have one judging by the work the person that claimed to be one did), I would be in favor of dropping the ball and removing the debian directory, unless someone steps up for assuming this role, but I mean, with a real intention of commitment to the task. -- Gilles.