Re: [RFU 1.7] nasm-2.06-1

[Dave Korn <dave dot korn dot cygwin at googlemail dot com>]

Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> On Jul  1 09:01, Dean Scarff wrote:
>> Upstream release.
>>
>> Built for cygwin 1.7.
>>
>> There are a couple of relevant packaging conventions that I've noticed
>> discussed on this list and in practice that contradict
>> http://cygwin.com/setup.html yet haven't had an official response (at
>> least I can't find it in the archives).
>>
>>  - should setup.hint have requires: cygwin?  nasm's does.

  No, that's now an obsolete practice, it should be removed.  See e.g.:

http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin-apps/2009-06/msg00145.html

>>  - should it be /usr/share/doc/nasm or /usr/share/doc/nasm-2.06? nasm's
>>    is the former
> 
> Every package seems to have its own idea how to name the doc dir.  It's
> not *that* important.  I guess the better approach is to omit the
> version.  After all, you usually have just one of the packages installed
> and the user doesn't exactly care for the actual version of the package
> when looking for the docs.

  Omitting the version number is the new convention; see the thread: "[RFC]
1.7 Packaging: Documentation":

http://www.cygwin.com/ml/cygwin-apps/2008-08/threads.html#00081

    cheers,
      DaveK