On Tue, 26 Jan 1999, Darren Benham wrote:
>
> On 26-Jan-99 Jules Bean wrote:
> > Hi,
> Hello.
>
> > *Please*, if you have strong views on this subject, at least skim the
> > above threads, and those which follow on related issues, before entering
> > the debate. It was very drawn out last time.
Package: debian-policy
This is from a discussion on a Nethack packaging bug.
man rc.boot says that the /etc/rc.boot/ directory is obsolete, but
section 3.3.4 of Debian Policy (Boot-time initialisation) says that
/etc/rc.boot/ is okay to use.
The manpage from rc.boot says that /etc/rc.boot/ has b
Package: debian-policy
Version: 2.5.0.0
Section 3.3.4 of the policy manual still suggests the obsolete /etc/rc.boot
instead of the sysvinit standard of /etc/rcS.d as mentioned in
/usr/doc/sysvinit, man rc.boot, and lintian.
-- System Information
Debian Release: 2.1
Kernel Version: Linux brian 2
On 26-Jan-99 Jules Bean wrote:
> Hi,
Hello.
> *Please*, if you have strong views on this subject, at least skim the
> above threads, and those which follow on related issues, before entering
> the debate. It was very drawn out last time. It is an important issue,
> and I don't think we should vo
Hi,
In response to an issue on -legal, I am reopening the debate on how free
those parts of debian which are not software (or not precisely software)
should be.
IMO, this debate should be conducted on -policy, and I ask all replies to
this message to trim the CC: line.
This issue was discussed i
On Mon, Jan 25, 1999 at 01:54:24PM -0800, Daniel Quinlan wrote:
> I would like to be more certain that nobody is going to be upset by
> any changes to the mail spool specification in FHS, so could you tell
> me your distribution's preference on this?
>
> a) /var/mail (FHS 2.0)
> b) /var/spool/
Wichert writes:
>> Can we agree our preference is /var/mail, is stated in the
>> current FHS?
Manoj Srivastava <<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> While the new FHS is trying for conformance with other unices, we
> should also consider rtadition [...]
This is not quite the case. FHS 2.0, like prev
Hi,
>>"Wichert" == Wichert Akkerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Wichert> Previously Daniel Quinlan wrote:
>> I would like to be more certain that nobody is going to be upset by
>> any changes to the mail spool specification in FHS, so could you tell
>> me your distribution's preference on thi
On Mon, Jan 25, 1999 at 06:32:32PM -0700, Steve Bowman wrote:
> How about changing apache to support something like a cgi path? That
> would let us keep stuff in /usr/lib/cgi-bin and let the local web admin
> supplement or override it with her stuff in, say, /usr/local/lib/cgi-bin.
> I think this
On Fri, Jan 22, 1999 at 12:07:32PM -0500, Ben Collins wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 22, 1999 at 04:02:43PM +, Jules Bean wrote:
> > On Fri, 22 Jan 1999, Martin Schulze wrote:
> >
> > > Brian White wrote:
> > > > > If you file this as bug agains Apache you need to file it against all
> > > > > other
>
On Tue, Jan 26, 1999 at 03:02:09AM +0100, Vincent Renardias wrote:
> the other Unixen boxes summed up; 2nd, Debian never did gratuitous policy
> change just 'because some others are doing so' and I hope we won't start
> now.
I'm not commenting on whether or not /var/mail or /var/spool/mail
should
"Vincent" == Vincent Renardias <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Vincent> For the sake of compatibily with what? No other Linux
Vincent> currently uses it or plans to; As for the other Unix systems;
Hm, I thought it was our long-term goal all along to comply with the
FHS. The question here is whethe
On Mon, 25 Jan 1999, Johnie Ingram wrote:
> "Wichert" == Wichert Akkerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Wichert> Can we agree our preference is /var/mail, is stated in the
> Wichert> current FHS?
>
> I'd agree with that, for the sake of compatibility. Having postinsts
> make a symlink isn't
Actually, Alan Cox sums up the problem better than I did... ;)
-- Forwarded message --
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 00:37:41 + (GMT)
From: Alan Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: H. Peter Anvin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED],
deb
"Wichert" == Wichert Akkerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Wichert> Can we agree our preference is /var/mail, is stated in the
Wichert> current FHS?
I'd agree with that, for the sake of compatibility. Having postinsts
make a symlink isn't that big a deal.
- PGP E4 70 6E 59
On Tue, 26 Jan 1999, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> Previously Daniel Quinlan wrote:
> > I would like to be more certain that nobody is going to be upset by
> > any changes to the mail spool specification in FHS, so could you tell
> > me your distribution's preference on this?
>
> Can we agree our pr
Previously Daniel Quinlan wrote:
> I would like to be more certain that nobody is going to be upset by
> any changes to the mail spool specification in FHS, so could you tell
> me your distribution's preference on this?
Can we agree our preference is /var/mail, is stated in the current FHS?
Wiche
17 matches
Mail list logo
