This message is in MIME format.  The first part should be readable text,
  while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools.

--0-919720805-1177083062=:23700
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=X-UNKNOWN
Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE
Content-ID: <Pine.NEB.4.64.0704201031181.23700@glacier.reedmedia.net>

On Fri, 20 Apr 2007, Przemys=C5~Baw Pawe=C5~Bczyk wrote:

> I opened the file to check what I could get from OO.org:
> ftp://ftp.NetBSD.org/pub/NetBSD/packages/pkgsrc/README-all.html
>
> openoffice2 is without binaries.
> openoffice2-bin is with binaries but for Suse.
>
> My questions:
> 1) Is the first item for NetBSD but for compilation on my own?

Yes, build from source using pkgsrc. Hopefully not specific for NetBSD.

> 2) If the second item is for Suse why it is not said on related page:
> ftp://ftp.NetBSD.org/pub/NetBSD/packages/pkgsrc/chat/ekg/README.html=20

(Wrong URL.)

Yes, the DESCR should add a sentence saying "This package contains
pre-built binaries provided by OpenOffice.org." or something like that.

But it is not specific to SuSE as the same package can provide prebuilt=20
binaries for Solaris also.

Also not specific for this package, but in some cases we have provided=20
-bin packages that actually provided prebuilt packages built on NetBSD for=
=20
NetBSD (so not Linux compat).

> I think "Suse sign" (word(s)) should be attached to description fields
> in README-all.html as well. All suse apps should be manifested in this
> way.
>=20
> I'd suggest also changing "bin" part in the names for "suse" (e.g.
> openoffice-suse-x.y.z). "Bin" tells that the thing is in binary form
> (ok, it is) for NetBSD.

One of the plans is for Linux binaries to not be "SuSE" only. Work has=20
been done to use Debian Linux packages for Linux (on NetBSD) also. And I=20
have used some Linux binaries via pkgsrc on my PkgLinux.

In addition, several of the "-bin" packages have nothing to do with=20
"Linux" (or SuSE Linux) specifically, as they may provide prebuilt=20
binaries for BSD/OS or Solaris for example.

In most (hopefully all) cases the packages' brief comment should indicate=
=20
that is a "binary package". I do see that some DESCR files do need to be=20
updated to also indicate about this.

It has been mentioned to you a few times about using correct mailing=20
lists. You may get better results and reach a more defined audience by=20
choosing the correct mailing lists.

  Jeremy C. Reed
--0-919720805-1177083062=:23700--