Subject: Doubts building a new package...

From: [email-masked] (Emilio Lopes)
Date: Mon, 17 Jun 96 15:45 EST

Hi,

I'm planning to do a package, erh, hm, ... it's the Linux-2.0 Logo
package :-).

But I have some doubts:

1- There is some trouble with dpkg naming it linux-2.0-logo_1.0-0.all.deb?

2- The logo itself is a gif file. Is it non-free? I can convert it to
   a jpeg file if needed.

3- Where should I put the logo? /usr/lib/images?

4- Should it "depends" or simply "recommends" X11-image-viewer? I got
   this name from the xv package but it is not listed in
   virtual-package-names-list.text. I think it's a good idea to
   standardize this. Packages like pbmplus should then use this.

Thanks for your ideas.

Emilio.

-- 
 Emilio C. Lopes <mailto:[email-masked]>
 FINPE, Instituto de Fisica      E-mail: [email-masked]
 Universidade de Sao Paulo       Phone : (+55 11) 818-6724 (Voice)
 Caixa Postal 66318                      (+55 11) 818-6715 (Fax)
 05389-970  Sao Paulo - SP
 BRAZIL

---

From: Rob Browning <[email-masked]>
Date: 17 Jun 1996 14:03:05 -0500

> 2- The logo itself is a gif file. Is it non-free? I can convert it to

Don't know about the other stuff, but for this I'd recommend png, not
jpeg.  As I understand it gif's lossless, and so is png, and I think
png was meant to be the replacement for gif, so it'd be an appropriate
translation.  That said, I've never messed with png myself, but I've
been planning to start using it when appropriate.

--
Rob

---

From: [email-masked] (Emilio Lopes)
Date: Mon, 17 Jun 96 18:19 EST

>>>>> "AD" == Austin Donnelly <[email-masked]> wrote:

AD> I'm not convinced we need the package at all.

AD> After all, you get the image with the kernel sources anyway.

Sure? I didn't know that. It's really hidden in that "Documentation"
dir...

Anyway, maybe someone who does not want the sources may want the logo?

ECL.

---

From: Austin Donnelly <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 17 Jun 96 22:03 BST

> been planning to start using it when appropriate.

I'm not convinced we need the package at all.

After all, you get the image with the kernel sources anyway.

Austin

---

From: Jon Rabone <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 1996 00:04:27 +0100 (BST)

> Anyway, maybe someone who does not want the sources may want the logo?

It's also available separately on (at least) the funet mirror sites in the
same directory as the 2.0 source. I don't think we really need this, but
if you've got the time to fill...

Jon

---

From: "Susan G. Kleinmann" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 17 Jun 1996 19:12:25 -0400

> > jpeg.  

PNG is a bandwidth-conservative, patent-free replacement for GIF (as well 
as many uses of TIFF).  If you want to use it, you might be interested in 
looking at:
     http://www.boutell.com/boutell/png/

Cheers,
Susan Kleinmann
[email-masked]

---

From: Lars Wirzenius <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 1996 02:28:03 +0300

[ Note: I read this mailing list.  There is no need to CC me on replies,
  unless it is _really_ urgent.  I pay for my PPP connections.  Thanks. ]

> if you've got the time to fill...

I doubt there is much need for a linux-logo package (but if one is made,
the proposed name linux-2.0-logo is distracting, due to the version number
in the middle -- linux-logo should do equally well).

For those of you who have some free time, perhaps designing a flashy
xdm login screen would be a better project.  That is, something more
sexy than the default criss-cross background with a dull, white
"login:/Password:" window in the middle.  It should be optional to
use this (not everyone's machine is idle when displaying the xdm login
screen, and a fancy one can use up a lot of memory), so it should be
a separate package.

The Linux 2.0 penguin should definitely be part of it.

I don't remember if Debian has a logo, but if it does, that should also
be part of it.

Imagine a roomful of student workstation, all of them displaying
Linux and Debian logos.  Any students working in that room every day
will feel that their Red Hat systems at home lack that special something
and will soon switch to Debian instead.

---

From: Rob Browning <[email-masked]>
Date: 17 Jun 1996 18:34:55 -0500

>   unless it is _really_ urgent.  I pay for my PPP connections.  Thanks. ]

Hmm, what if the debian lists had a Reply-to header that was the list
in question.  That would cut down on unintentional replies.  Or is
that a violation of standard practice?
 
> "login:/Password:" window in the middle.  It should be optional to

This sounds like a good idea, but unfortunately, I'm not sure it's
important enough that someone'll be willing to take the time to do
it.  It would be good PR though.

> The Linux 2.0 penguin should definitely be part of it.

Yes.

> I don't remember if Debian has a logo, but if it does, that should also

No, we used to use the baby GNU, but, well...

Anyway, I had a friend (graphic artist) that was working on something,
but I wouldn't hold your breath.  He's busy too.

--
Rob

---

From: Rob Browning <[email-masked]>
Date: 17 Jun 1996 18:19:39 -0500

>      http://www.boutell.com/boutell/png/

Thanks, Susan, that's what I meant to say :>

--
Rob

---

From: Lars Wirzenius <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 1996 02:53:49 +0300

Rob Browning:
> in question.  That would cut down on unintentional replies.  

It's a bad idea.  It makes it more difficult to choose whom the replies 
should go to.  Sometimes one wants to reply to the list, sometimes to
the author.  If there is a Reply-to, in many MUA's it is more difficult
to reply to the author (i.e., you'd have to copy the address, often
by hand if not using X).

Also, some people happen to prefer to get replies via a Cc as well via
the list, since they sort the mailing list to a folder, and might not
read it every day.  Mailing lists can also be slower.

So, I wouldn't vote for an automatic Reply-to to the list.  I'm quite
happy with the annoying message at the beginning, especially since I
don't have to do anything special to get it there (I just select
"Reply to list" from the exmh menu, instead of "Reply to all" -- the
list reply is my addition, btw).

> it.  It would be good PR though.

The hard part is designing what it should look like.  If it is kept
simple, it's just a nice background image (and that would be quite good
enough, at least to begin with).  Putting that image to the screen is
trivial.

XBanner might also be worth a look.

(I may play with this sooner or later -- I tend to play with my X 
configuration anyway, when I'm tired and should be doing something
imporant. :-)

> No, we used to use the baby GNU, but, well...

Ah.  That might be, shall we say, not the right choice, politically, unless
relations with the FSF warm up a bit first.  (Always a possibility, and
I'd certainly welcome it.)

> but I wouldn't hold your breath.  He's busy too.

  "Boss, can I ask you something?"
  "Sure."
  "Everyone's always talking about vacations and free time and things like
that.  How come I never have any?"
  "You wouldn't like it."
  "But they it's better than work.  They really forward to it."
  "Remember last year, when the office was shut down for a week."
  "When they replace all windows?  Sure I remember.  I couldn't play with
a computer for a week.  Horrible."
  "Vacations are like that."
  "Oh."
  "So you wouldn't like them."
  "But everyone else does."
  "Ah, but that's because they're lusers, not hackers."
  "Oh."
  "Now go back and write that compiler.  We need it last week."

---

From: [email-masked] (Emilio Lopes)
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 96 11:12 EST

>>>>> "LW" == Lars Wirzenius wrote:

LW> For those of you who have some free time, perhaps designing a flashy
LW> xdm login screen would be a better project.  That is, something more
LW> sexy than the default criss-cross background with a dull, white
LW> "login:/Password:" window in the middle.  It should be optional to
LW> use this (not everyone's machine is idle when displaying the xdm login
LW> screen, and a fancy one can use up a lot of memory), so it should be
LW> a separate package.

I can try to do that. I'll have a look at xbanner.

Also, a friend is using a tk script to do something like this. But,
probably, we don't want it to depend on tcl/tk, do we?

LW> The Linux 2.0 penguin should definitely be part of it.

Of course. I loved that penguin!
LW> I don't remember if Debian has a logo, but if it does, that should also
LW> be part of it.

We had that baby Gnu, but that was in the old times...

Ciao, Emilio.