Sender: rich AT delorie DOT com
Message-ID: <38E734E0.37DEA743@bigfoot.com>
Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2000 12:54:08 +0100
From: Richard Dawe <richdawe AT bigfoot DOT com>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.51 [en] (X11; I; Linux 2.2.14 i586)
X-Accept-Language: de,fr
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: Adding DJGPP software manifests
References: <Pine DOT SUN DOT 3 DOT 91 DOT 1000402085844 DOT 8988P-100000 AT is>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com

Hello.

Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> 
> On Fri, 24 Mar 2000, Laurynas Biveinis wrote:
> 
> > To make the next version of LBInstDJ work, DSMs are required
> > for most popular packages in simtelnet. Maybe it's a time
> > start adding them?
> 
> Probably.

I think I would prefer zippo to be tested a bit more, just in case there's
anything we haven't thought about with the DSM syntax. So far all that's
been coded and tested is package installs - I'd like to write & test
uninstalls & upgrades too.

> > Richard Dawe and I have already written DSMs for a
> > lot of packages. I can send them to the maintainers,
> > if they agree.
> 
> Yes, please.
> 
> It's perhaps a good idea to ust post them here (I'm assuming they are
> short).

Yes, they're about 20-30 lines. However, About 126 DSMs have been written,
so maybe there are too many. If you want to take a look at some, they're
here:

http://www.phekda.freeserve.co.uk/richdawe/zippo/dsm/

Please note that this is slightly out-of-date with CVS - I've written a
few more.

With regard to incorporation into packages - are we talking about the
original packages or the ports? I think the DSM belongs in the port rather
than the original sources.

Bye,

-- 
Richard Dawe
richdawe AT bigfoot DOT com ICQ 47595498 http://www.bigfoot.com/~richdawe/