Re: /etc/shells management

2003-09-06 Thread Karl Ramm
> > "Martin" == Martin Godisch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Martin> and the entry in /etc/shells should be added again, since it was > Martin> there when we begun. How does the postinst know that this is no > Martin> upgrade? Why doesn't add-shell care for this, so the postinst >

Re: /etc/shells management

2003-09-06 Thread Karl Ramm
> [Bastian Blank] > > i think the scripts should follow the update-X naming schema. Because update-foo usually has different semantics, i.e. rebuilding a file (like /etc/modules.conf) from a directory of file. There might be an update-shells that does this someday; if there is, it will probably g

Re: Transition: new PAM config file handling in unstable

2003-08-22 Thread Karl Ramm
Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > - Essential packages which currently pre-depend on libpam0g (read: > login) will also need a versioned Pre-Depends on libpam-runtime > before adopting this scheme, so that they are usable in an > unconfigured state. Please consider this an introdu

Re: New maintainer behaviour with NMU and LogJam's hijacking

2002-12-03 Thread Karl Ramm

Re: New maintainer behaviour with NMU and LogJam's hijacking

2002-12-02 Thread Karl Ramm
Ari Pollak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I had been taking the full brunt of the responsibility for the > xscreensaver NMU, but since I was a pre-NM at the time and sponsors of > uploads are supposed to follow Debian policy as well, he ended up taking > most of the responsibility. This was a sim