I don't know the official answer, but here's what
(as a long-time debian user) I'd suggest:
If the foo-doc package is documentation for foo,
it should go in the same group as foo.
If the package doesn't have a corresponding non-doc
package, or documents many packages, it should go
in the doc sect
Hello
[one last try, because nobody answered me]
> Can anybody give me a hint where in the policy/packaging-manual is a
> rule that decides whether -doc packages should go to /doc or,
> toghether with the binary package in /net or /x11 etc.
>
> The current situation on the FTP server is not clear.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Adam,
Your statements seem to be based on the assumption that Debian
communication is the sum total of my email. Not true. I indeed use
procmail, and have done so for quite sometime now, and I even venture to
suggest that I might be able to teach you a t
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Send your questions to ``ASK ZIPPY'', Box 40474, San Francisco, CA
94140, USA
On Wed, 28 Jul 1999, Adam Rogoyski wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Jul 1999, Jor-el wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I recently had a developer sign my PGP key, but I havent yet
> > resolved in m
>
>You are missing the point here. I met you, learned by Government
> issued ID that you are, infact, Kenneth Stephen, which is the name that
> appears on the pgp key who's fingerprint you gave me at our meeting. Upon
> retrieving your actual public key and verifying the fingerprint, I know
On Tue, 27 Jul 1999, Jor-el wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I recently had a developer sign my PGP key, but I havent yet
> resolved in my own mind some of the points he brought up.
>
> I use two email ids : this one (Jor-el <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) and
> another one which uses my real name, and which f
On 99-07-28 Steven V. Russo wrote:
> I wonder if anyone can tell me why no one has responded to me from
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] I submitted my application months ago, and
> sent two follow up applications. I believe I followed their procedure
Would you please read in the mail archives about this? Th
On Tue, 27 Jul 1999, Jor-el wrote:
> 3. As I pointed out in my email, if the developer in question
> wasnt sure that the email id of Jor-el belonged to me, then he wouldnt be
> able to sign the following id too : "Bob Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. This is
> so ridiculous, becuase it is perfec
Le Wed, Jul 28, 1999 at 06:28:21PM +, Steven V. Russo écrivait:
> I wonder if anyone can tell me why no one has responded to me from
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] I submitted my application months ago, and
> sent two follow up applications. I believe I followed their procedure
> as closely as possible.
On Wed, Jul 28, 1999 at 06:28:21PM +, Steven V. Russo wrote:
> I wonder if anyone can tell me why no one has responded to me from
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] I submitted my application months ago, and
> sent two follow up applications. I believe I followed their procedure
> as closely as possible...
On Wed, Jul 28, 1999 at 08:10:07PM +0200, Jozef Hitzinger wrote:
>
> smartupstools .rpm package puts files in /usr/cgi-bin & /usr/misc.
> these are not in FHS nor FSSTND, but I thought RedHat holds the FHS.
red hat does *not* hold the the FHS in all areas. From what I've heard,
debian holds the
> smartupstools .rpm package puts files in /usr/cgi-bin & /usr/misc.
> may I put the files there in .deb too, or should I put them elsewhere?
They probably belong elsewhere. What are the files?
> (hm - am I asking the question on the right list?)
Yes. :)
smartupstools .rpm package puts files in /usr/cgi-bin & /usr/misc.
these are not in FHS nor FSSTND, but I thought RedHat holds the FHS.
may I put the files there in .deb too, or should I put them elsewhere?
(hm - am I asking the question on the right list?)
--
jozef :-)
Hi! I'm a .signatur
I wonder if anyone can tell me why no one has responded to me from
[EMAIL PROTECTED] I submitted my application months ago, and
sent two follow up applications. I believe I followed their procedure
as closely as possible... How can I get a response from them?! I am
really eager to develop for De
Hi there.
I'm trying to debianise smartupstools (www.exploits.org, very nice). If
it'll do, I'd like to apply for a maintainer (it's going to be funny too,
as I read the mails here), but for now I'm quite stuck:
There are two daemons, running as nobody.nogroup, and they need to access
the state
On Tue, Jul 27, 1999 at 08:59:34PM -0500, Ardo van Rangelrooij wrote:
> Source: libsgmls-perl
> Section: text
> Priority: optional
> Maintainer: Ardo van Rangelrooij <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Standards-Version: 2.5.1.0
> ...
> dh_gencontrol
> dpkg-control: error: source package has two conflicti
Hi,
I'm trying to split libsgmls-perl (formarly also known as sgmlspm)
into libsgmls-perl and sgmlspl using the following control file
and rules file:
==
Source: libsgmls-perl
Section: text
Priority: optional
Maintainer: Ardo van Ra
On Tue, Jul 27, 1999 at 07:26:04PM +, David Coe wrote:
> So I don't want to replace the current ispell with it,
> until it has been released, but do want to package it and
> make it available to users who want to try it (and help
> test/debug it).
This sounds like experimental (see the new ma
18 matches
Mail list logo
