On Mon, 6 Oct 1997, Christian Schwarz wrote:
> On 5 Oct 1997, Darren/Torin/Who Ever... wrote:
>
> > >Sorry, but I still don't understand your point. I totally agree with you
> > >that the current situation is not nice, but this is neither a bug in the
> > >policy nor in less. The bug is that the "editor" and "pager" packages have
> > >not been updated to latest policy (or the maintainers simply forgot about
> > >this change).
> >
> > The point is that there is no "editor" package and I can't file a
> > dependency on one since policy specifically says I can't.
>
> Huh? Once again, we are talking about a "bug" in all packages providing an
> editor.
>
> For example, the package "ae" definitely has to provide editor. It's
> included in the base system. Thus, as soon as "ae" is updated, the
> problems you mentioned should be gone.
>
> Of course, all other editor packages need to be updated too.
>
> Please reassign this bug to ae.
>
I have been somewhat confused by this thread. I am finally starting to get
the idea of what is being discussed. At first I thought we were "again"
discussing the "editor" virtual package (an idea that was discussed and
vetoed)
As the maintainer of ae, this is the first time that I have heard about
ae's responsibilities for providing /usr/bin/editor. I don't remember
there ever being a discussion on this issue. (If it was discussed on
debian-policy this could be the reason. I don't subscribe to
debian-policy) Can someone point me to the relevant chapters in the policy
manual?
Thanks,
Dwarf
--
_-_-_-_-_-_- _-_-_-_-_-_-_-
aka Dale Scheetz Phone: 1 (904) 656-9769
Flexible Software 11000 McCrackin Road
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tallahassee, FL 32308
_-_-_-_-_-_- If you don't see what you want, just ask _-_-_-_-_-_-_-
