Re: Documentation

2001-08-04 Thread shaulka
On Sat, Aug 04, 2001 at 04:40:38PM +0430, Pratik Sinha wrote: > is there anyother documentation available on deb packaging other than > packaging manual and the maint-guide??? > You might try debian-policy, and look in the devel pages of www.debian.org. For specific packaging questions try this

Documentation

2001-08-04 Thread Pratik Sinha
is there anyother documentation available on deb packaging other than packaging manual and the maint-guide??? friendly, pratik --

"invalid ICMP error to broadcast"

2001-08-04 Thread John S. Gage
I keep getting the following messages on my terminal screen: "NET: 53 messages suppressed 172.16.160.53 sent an invalid ICMP error to a broadcast 172.16.160.53 sent an invalid ICMP error to a broadcast 172.16.160.53 sent an invalid ICMP error to a broadcast 172.16.160.53 sent an invalid ICMP erro

Re: Documentation

2001-08-04 Thread shaulka
On Sat, Aug 04, 2001 at 04:40:38PM +0430, Pratik Sinha wrote: > is there anyother documentation available on deb packaging other than packaging >manual and the maint-guide??? > You might try debian-policy, and look in the devel pages of www.debian.org. For specific packaging questions try this

Documentation

2001-08-04 Thread Pratik Sinha
is there anyother documentation available on deb packaging other than packaging manual and the maint-guide??? friendly, pratik -- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

"invalid ICMP error to broadcast"

2001-08-04 Thread John S. Gage
I keep getting the following messages on my terminal screen: "NET: 53 messages suppressed 172.16.160.53 sent an invalid ICMP error to a broadcast 172.16.160.53 sent an invalid ICMP error to a broadcast 172.16.160.53 sent an invalid ICMP error to a broadcast 172.16.160.53 sent an invalid ICMP erro

Shared libraries and sections

2001-08-04 Thread Will Newton
Two quick questions for anyone who has the time: 1. I have a package that by default installs a library libname.so (as opposed to a versioned name like libname.so.1). I assume this is bad because it means two major versions cannot reside on the same system. Does this need to be fixed? There d