Marco d'Itri wrote:
>
> [Please Cc all replies.]
> On Oct 23, Christian Schwarz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >I suggest to change policy so that every Debian package has to use
> >liblockdev to lock/unlock devices.
> We should not force to modify all packages, not every maintainer is
> a C pr
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christian Lynbech on satellite) wrote on 21.10.97 in
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> How about something like:
I like it, especially as it points out why all this is important, and that
people should actually use the heads they have.
MfG Kai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Manoj Srivastava) wrote on 24.10.97 in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >>"Joost" == Joost Kooij <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Joost> I agree that indeed only very, very occasionally the
> Joost> mailinglists get disturbed in a way that ought to call for
> Joost> measures. So rarely in
> You are arguing for an atomic kernel operation. Is that really fair?
No, actually, I'm simply pointing out that saying "there would be no
possibilities for errors" was, as it stood, incorrect -- and your
argument depended on it being correct. It's a minor point, but I
thought I made that clea
[ I'm replying, even though I want this thread to die! ]
Mark Eichin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > A src-orig-*.deb file is a simple wrapper for the tarballs + any extra
> > information you want to add to the description. It would be possible
> > to wrap one around a tarball with a single com
[Please Cc all replies.]
On Oct 23, Christian Schwarz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I suggest to change policy so that every Debian package has to use
>liblockdev to lock/unlock devices.
We should not force to modify all packages, not every maintainer is a C
programmer who knows how to modify the
> Unfortunately, my hopes have been dashed. I now realize that dpkg has
> only ever aspired to be "throw away code", so I should look elsewhere
Tsk, tsk. Not all custom applications are throwaway, even though the
"unix philosophy" might indicate that. Sometimes, as in this case,
they actually
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kai Henningsen) writes:
> And when people tell you technical points where your proposal is flawed,
> those are "knee-jerk reactions", "uninformed opinions", and "aesthetics"?
>
> Something is very wrong here.
My fault. I was a bit stressed, and didn't take criticism very we
[ Here goes my 2nd try - 2.0.31 has froze twice on me today, arrgh. ]
Mark Eichin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I don't think I'll find any src-orig-*.deb files on prep. My point
> was that I can take the .tar.gz files that I *do* find everywhere and
> just use them, without having to go throug
Andreas Jellinghaus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Please tell me where I am wrong.
>
> your create complexity where there is none.
> source handling works very fine for me, and i simply do not understand
> why you add this complexity, like managing sources as root.
1) I see much less comple
Hi,
>>"Santiago" == Santiago Vila Doncel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Santiago> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- On 24 Oct 1997, Manoj
Santiago> Srivastava wrote:
Santiago> This should be considered as a bug (wishlist),
>> I object. This versioning scheme may need *one* epoch, in the year
>> 20
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Pick) wrote on 23.10.97 in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Please tell me where I am wrong.
>
> In my head, at least, I haven't found a single flaw in my proposal.
> Maybe there is a flaw, and the point just hasn't been driven home
> to me yet.
>
> Most of the opposition appears to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Santiago Vila Doncel) wrote on 24.10.97 in <[EMAIL
PROTECTED]>:
> > > `96May05' is the same as `1996.05.05'.)
> 1. Preferred: .MM.DD or .MM
I'd suggest using -MM[-DD] instead. That one is an ISO standard (8601,
IIRC).
MfG Kai
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
On 24 Oct 1997, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Santiago> This should be considered as a bug (wishlist),
>
> I object. This versioning scheme may need *one* epoch, in the
> year 2000, if and only if the upstream author continues with the
> version scheme then
Just to make it clear, not to keep pounding, but:
>Again, with the proposed system, this is easy - just install an upgraded
>src-orig-*.deb file.
I don't think I'll find any src-orig-*.deb files on prep. My point
was that I can take the .tar.gz files that I *do* find everywhere and
just use them
> To the rest of the list: We've been seeing a fair amount of noise
> recently, whether of the kind quoted above, or miscellaneous user
> questions to debian-devel (of which we've had a couple recently), or
> whatever.
>
> I propose that if we get much more we close the debian-policy and
> debian
On Thu, 23 Oct 1997, Bruce Perens wrote:
> From: Christian Schwarz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > REF: cf. #7890, cf. #11095
>
> Are these article numbers or something? They would not be the same on my
> system as on yours.
No, these are bug reports:
#7890: Policy manual contradicts itself about i
On 24 Oct 1997, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Joost> The last time there was an issue, I actually enjoyed the fun to
> Joost> read digests and I frankly cannot imagine a situation where
> Joost> stronger action is needed ( except maybe for people posting
> Joost> their kernels - I wouldn't want a dige
here is my tutorial of dsource, a 100% vaporware program.
$ mkdir ~/debian# Choose where you want stuff
$ cd ~/debian # alternative "echo root=~/dir > ~/.dsource"
$ dsource-ftp get hello
Connecting to my.ftp.server.
Changing Diretory to /debian/dist/stable/main/so
Hi,
>>"James" == James Troup <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
James> (Hmm, Manoj, why does make depend on libelfg0 for i386? It
James> doesn't for m68k and appears to work)
Auuugh. It is the old bug 7807 resurfacing
again!. configure thinks that like Solaris, Linux needs -lelf. I'll
need
Hi,
>>"Santiago" == Santiago Vila Doncel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Santiago> * We shall consider upstream sources using 2-digit years as
Santiago> an "oddity".
Ok.
Santiago> This should be considered as a bug (wishlist),
I object. This versioning scheme may need *one* epoch, i
Hi,
>>"Andreas" == Andreas Jellinghaus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Some people suggested to have an extra directory level for the
>> documentation file format (e.g. 'HTML/'). I suggest to postpone the
>> discussion about this sub-topic until we discuss the `documentation
>> policy'. (Until then
Hi,
>>"Andreas" == Andreas Jellinghaus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Andreas> On Thu 23 Oct 1997, Christian Schwarz wrote:
>> Topic 4: Announcing new packages before uploading them
Andreas> we should stop announcing and let a script on master do this.
This is a separate issue. Maybe the p
Hi,
>>"Joost" == Joost Kooij <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Joost> I agree that indeed only very, very occasionally the
Joost> mailinglists get disturbed in a way that ought to call for
Joost> measures. So rarely in fact that all too much emphasis on
Joost> possible measures might be a bigger disturb
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I think this topic (choosing packages which were supposed to be
> installed) has come up before, and there was a list of packages
> floating around; however, choosing required, important, and standard
> packages should also do it.
But as you say, tha
[I still need CC:s. Thanks :-]
>i propose a slightly modified version :
>lets create a config file or so, where the sysadmin can say
>"new daemons should register in runlevels X Y Z".
That sounds excellent. I've always been a bit wary about the
"install and start everything at once" approach ta
On Thu 23 Oct 1997, Thomas Koenig wrote:
> My suggestion would be that daemons should be started up according to
> the runlevel the system currently is in. Interaction in postinst script
> should only be done when absolutely necessary, IMHO.
i don't like this idea. it is very usefull, for normal
> Please tell me where I am wrong.
your create complexity where there is none.
source handling works very fine for me, and i simply do not understand
why you add this complexity, like managing sources as root.
i only see the disadvantages.
so : please not show me example code, please show me a
On Thu 23 Oct 1997, Christian Schwarz wrote:
>
> Topic 13: Starting daemons in the postinst scripts
like my proposal to topic #12 :
if you want to query the admin, please recognize some special file or
variable "e.g. /etc/dpkg/fastconfig", do not start the daemon, and
add a line to a log file, s
Quoting Kai's message you deleted the wrong parts of the message, thus
putting in Bruce's pen what I wrote.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> [Fabrizio wrote:]
> > > I have noticed some interesting ideas in some messages, but their
> > > language convinced me that they were not worth of my attention.
>
Kai Henningsen wrote:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Fabrizio Polacco) wrote on 23.10.97:
>
> > Disrespectful language and obscentity disqualify only those that use
> > them. Ignoring them is the right thing to do, IMO.
>
> IMO, it depends entirely on the situation.
Yes, it's true and I agree.
I suppo
On Thu, Oct 23, 1997 at 10:53:39PM +0200, Christian Schwarz wrote:
> 2. Serial devices
This point was also adressed in Brian White's "Upcoming Debian Releases"
document
(http://www.debian.org/Lists-Archives/debian-devel-9709/msg00042.html).
Could you please explain how you see the relation b
On Thu, 23 Oct 1997, Dave Cinege wrote:
> On Thu, 23 Oct 97 10:27 PDT, Bruce Perens wrote:
>
> >OK. Let me restate the problem.
> >
> >I want guidelines for:
> >
> > 1. Digesting an individual's postings.
> > 2. Placing an individual on moderation.
> > 3. Entirely blocking an individu
On Fri, 24 Oct 1997, Santiago Vila Doncel wrote:
> On Fri, 24 Oct 1997, Ian Jackson wrote:
>
> > As far as I am concerned there is only one remaining issue to be
> > settled with regard to this field: the list of packages upon which
> > dependencies do not need to be listed. I propose that this
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bruce Perens) writes:
> From: Christian Schwarz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > REF: cf. #7890, cf. #11095
>
> Are these article numbers or something?
They're bug report numbers.
--
James
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
On Fri, 24 Oct 1997, Ian Jackson wrote:
> As far as I am concerned there is only one remaining issue to be
> settled with regard to this field: the list of packages upon which
> dependencies do not need to be listed. I propose that this list be:
> packages whic
> I'd prefer Joey's solution: xbase should install a script `install-wm' (or
> similar) which is called by all window manager's postinst scripts. The
> `install-wm' script will ask the sysadmin where to place the new wm (top
> or bottom of the file).
>
> Any other ideas?
a directory doesn't help
On Thu 23 Oct 1997, Christian Schwarz wrote:
>
> Topic 4: Announcing new packages before uploading them
we should stop announcing and let a script on master do this.
andreas
a) if someone looks for documentation, she changes the directory to
/usr/doc/, and looks what is in there. so people will not find
documentation in /usr/doc/LANG/
b) for one file a directory isn't necessary, in my opinion.
/usr/doc//. is ok for me.
locale should be the 2 char language code, or _,
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
On Fri, 24 Oct 1997, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > Some upstream sources use a `snapshot date' instead of a real version
> > number. As these `dates' are used as version id for dpkg it is useful to
> > make them all use the same format. (It doesn't matter if our versio
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
On Thu, 23 Oct 1997, Christian Schwarz wrote:
> ``The shell `/bin/sh' may be symbolic link to any POSIX compatible
> shell. If a script uses non-POSIX features the appropriate shell
> has to be specified in the first line of the script (i.e.
>
|"Ronald> The real question is: do we want rules or do we trust that
|"Ronald> everyone will behave as mature individuals.
|"
|" I think that past experience shows that peope can't be
|" expected to behave as mature individulas, at least not all people,
|" all of the time.
That's what I said
Mark Eichin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Clever -- but an amazing kludge :-) Remember that it's ok for this to
> be hackish for "installing debian packages in user space" because
> that's simply a *rare* operation -- the whole point of debian packages
> is that they fit cleanly into a debian sys
>Using dpkg this way is great for my proposed source packages, but it is
>also useful for any Debian package you might want to install in
>user space only.
Clever -- but an amazing kludge :-) Remember that it's ok for this to
be hackish for "installing debian packages in user space" because
that
I would like to add another benefit of Source-Depends: which I
consider important simply because it would have saved me significant
grief in the past: it lets a package maintainer pass along important
details to whoever manages the package next, so they don't have to
find out by trial and error. T
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ian Jackson)
> You might also find that becoming a developer would enhance your credibility.
There's a little trust issue standing in the way of that, I fear.
Bruce
--
Can you get your operating system fixed when you need it?
Linux - the supportable operating sys
Paul,
Actually, I've said a number of things that I would not be saying on
the list if we returned to the rules of discourse the project used in
years past. I think that would be for the best.
Think of it as an intelligence test. If someone isn't smart enough to
be able to communicate any idea wi
> You are forgetting that when you run dpkg-source -x, it copies a
> .orig.tar.gz file to your directory. So there is no difference in
> disk space used.
Disk space wasn't the point -- just actual steps of work involved (and
by steps I mean "points of failure" as well, ie. more automation does
*
Hi,
I think this topic (choosing packages which were supposed to
be installed) has come up before, and there was a list of packages
floating around; however, choosing required, important, and standard
packages should also do it.
That means, currently, 133 packages (from the ava
From: Christian Schwarz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> REF: cf. #7890, cf. #11095
Are these article numbers or something? They would not be the same on my
system as on yours.
Bruce
--
Can you get your operating system fixed when you need it?
Linux - the supportable operating system. http://www.
From: Jim Pick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Most of the opposition appears to be based on the fact that I have
> violated some aesthetic
This is on target. There is indeed an aesthetic that is an important
part of software architecture. The best software is not simply
functional, but beautiful. Much that
Hi,
>>"Jim" == Jim Pick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Jim> [1 ] Manoj Srivastava
Jim> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Umm, but if I have to have Debian specific software installed (or
>> know gory details of the internal structure) in order to check the
>> upstream source. Like, I can't just upload
In no particular order ...
1. Source packages have different kinds of dependencies to binary
packages.
2. You can have several versions of the same source package installed
at once.
3. Source packages can be unpacked in various different places.
4. A source packages lives in one or two director
Hi all,
I've just repackaged hello using my new proposed source packaging
scheme which does away with dpkg-source and uses just dpkg and
standard .deb files instead.
You can grab the files from:
ftp://ftp.jimpick.com/pub/debian/experimental/hello/
444 Oct 22 14:49 README
17506 Oct
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ian Jackson) writes:
> In no particular order ...
>
> 1. Source packages have different kinds of dependencies to binary
> packages.
The stuff is either on your system or not. That is all a dependency
enforces. If you look at it that way, source dependencies are identical
to
From: Jim Pick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> I've just repackaged hello using my new proposed source packaging
> scheme which does away with dpkg-source and uses just dpkg and
> standard .deb files instead.
Good try, but I think it falls short of the mark in a few ways.
Have you discussed this with Klee?
Hi,
I must say, this is pretty impressive. I think we still may
need to work out the dependencies (built vs tar etc), but this seems
to have definite promise.
manoj
--
He who by here and now abandoning sensuality, has gone forth a
homeless wanderer, the search for pleasure ex
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bruce Perens) writes:
> Good try, but I think it falls short of the mark in a few ways.
> Have you discussed this with Klee? He has ideas in the same direction.
Klee hasn't told me any detail about what he plans on doing, unfortunately.
The whole complete concept only came to
Jim, it's a clever hack for a morning's work. I don't think it's more than
a mock-up of a real tool to do the job, though. I think we should take the
ideas you've generated and put lots more time and thought into a clean and
elegant design for automated building. I think packaging is just a little
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bruce Perens) writes:
> > I don't think that Debian stuff should go upstream.
>
> Do you offer any justification for that? I think it's a really nice feature
> when Debian stuff is built into a software package and no diff is necessary.
Have you used automake? It does a prett
Without arguing any more, I think it's fair to say that I'd want to
look really hard at some alternatives before the project chooses a
source package format. I'd be listening to Ian Jackson's opinion,
since Ian is the author of dpkg and now has time for the project again.
I'd give a lot of weight t
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bruce Perens) writes:
> Without arguing any more, I think it's fair to say that I'd want to
> look really hard at some alternatives before the project chooses a
> source package format. I'd be listening to Ian Jackson's opinion,
> since Ian is the author of dpkg and now has time
We recently had some conversation on rules of discourse for the mailing
lists. At that time, discussion by most developers was strongly against
them. Only myself and two other people spoke out for them at all.
I want to check for opinions one more time before abandoning them.
If we do that, disres
|"I want to check for opinions one more time before abandoning them.
|"If we do that, disrespectful language will be allowed, and obscentity
|"will be allowed. Is this really what people want?
That I find to be something I really don't want on mailinglists - leading
questions. Of course people don
From: Jim Pick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Funny that there has been so much negative reaction -- and nobody has
> even bothered to download the samples I put up yet.
I'm sorry, but your technical description was more than sufficient :-)
Since you insisted that I download your package, I have done so. I
Bruce Perens wrote:
>
> We recently had some conversation on rules of discourse for the
> mailing lists. At that time, discussion by most developers was
> strongly against them. Only myself and two other people spoke out
> for them at all.
>
> I want to check for opinions one more time before aba
From: Ronald van Loon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> O, btw, without meaning to be disrespectful to you, but how would you have
> liked it if I had started this with: "Do we really want a project leader
> who asks leading questions ?
My job is to lead the developers to a consensus. Stirring up discussion i
I was flabbergasted last night when I saw that Jim had answered my
14-point `why-not' list point by point. That message was intended to
terminate the discussion, not start one.
I've read Jim's writings on this subject and he is completely wrong.
I really have better things to do with my time than
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
On 22 Oct 1997, Jim Pick wrote:
> 444 Oct 22 14:49 README
> 17506 Oct 22 14:42 hello_1.3-13.1_i386.deb
> 4306 Oct 22 14:53 src-deb-hello_1.3-1.1_all.deb
> 88758 Oct 22 14:54 src-orig-hello_1.3-1_all.deb
> [ ... ]
> drwxr-xr-x jim/jim
Hi,
>>"Ian" == Ian Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Ian> I was flabbergasted last night when I saw that Jim had answered
Ian> my 14-point `why-not' list point by point. That message was
Ian> intended to terminate the discussion, not start one.
How very patronizing. You decided that th
Hi,
>>"Ronald" == Ronald van Loon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Ronald> The real question is: do we want rules or do we trust that
Ronald> everyone will behave as mature individuals.
I think that past experience shows that peope can't be
expected to behave as mature individulas, at least n
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Umm, but if I have to have Debian specific software installed
> (or know gory details of the internal structure) in order to check
> the upstream source. Like, I can't just upload the Deb file to the
> dec alpha at work on a thick pipe to the
Santiago Vila Doncel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> So we have to make a new package for *every* source package?
We already do, when you run dpkg-source --build, it makes a .orig.tar.gz
file, a .diff.gz file, and a .dsc file.
My proposal does the same thing, except you'd use a different script
(p
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
On 23 Oct 1997, Jim Pick wrote:
> Santiago Vila Doncel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > So we have to make a new package for *every* source package?
>
> We already do, when you run dpkg-source --build, it makes a .orig.tar.gz
> file, a .diff.gz file, and a .d
> We already do, when you run dpkg-source --build, it makes a .orig.tar.gz
> file, a .diff.gz file, and a .dsc file.
Actually (though I admit hello-source.deb is a cool hack, it's still a
hack -- and debian has mostly gained it's superiority from getting the
*details* right; that's *why* dpkg is
75 matches
Mail list logo
