> Just one question, however: Should we keep the same sections? Data will
> surely have a different repartition of contains than main and maybe will
> should think about the way we'll place things before they get too big
> to move around.
Probably... I just don't want to make it part of the policy/
On Thu, Jul 22, 1999 at 07:57:31AM -0400, Michael Stone wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 22, 1999 at 04:08:26PM +1000, you wrote:
> > Perhaps someone would like to upload a .deb that does nothing more than
> > maintain symlinks?
> > Something as simple as having a /etc/cron.daily script that does:
> > [ -d
On Thu, Jul 22, 1999 at 04:08:26PM +1000, you wrote:
> Perhaps someone would like to upload a .deb that does nothing more than
> maintain symlinks?
>
> Something as simple as having a /etc/cron.daily script that does:
>
> [ -d /usr/doc ] || exit 0
>
> cd /usr/share/doc
> for di
> First of all, I should make it clear that in practice, this is
> probably even *less* important than the previous technical objection.
> But it is, still, a *technical* problem, however minor.
>
>
On Wed, Jul 21, 1999 at 11:33:52PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Bang!! That was the 4rth formal objection, and thus this
> proposal dies. It can be revived as a general resolution, but I do
> not have the enrgy to do that. We now have no amendment on the table
> to move the /usr/doc
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> retitle 40706 [REJECTED 21/7/99] /usr/share/doc vs. /usr/doc transition
Bug#40706: [AMENDMENT 17/7/99] /usr/share/doc vs. /usr/doc transition
Changed bug title.
> severity 40706 fixed
Bug#40706: [REJECTED 21/7/99] /usr/share/doc vs. /usr/doc transition
retitle 40706 [REJECTED 21/7/99] /usr/share/doc vs. /usr/doc transition
severity 40706 fixed
thanks
Hi,
>>"Gord" == Gordon Matzigkeit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Gord> Marcus's argument here is most compelling. It is not the
Gord> present cost of Manoj's proposal that is prohibitive, it is the
On Mon, Jul 19, 1999 at 10:59:59PM -0600, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
>
> On Mon, 19 Jul 1999, Darren O. Benham wrote:
>
> > No reason but "ease". If you, we, the ftpmasters want to do a
> > data/[main|contrib|non-free] on the same level as our current
> > [main|contrib|non-free] that's ok with me.
Hi,
>>"Chris" == Chris Waters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Chris> Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> >>"Chris" == Chris Waters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Chris> Which leaves the "user is used to '/usr/doc'" objection, which is a
Chris> *purely* aesthetic objection, not a technica
Hi,
>>"Jason" == Jason Gunthorpe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Jason> Well, say we provide a /usr/share/doc -> /usr/doc symlink -
Jason> couldn't those people who want to do this simply mv /usr/doc
Jason> to /usr/share and put the symlink in as /usr/doc ? Presto
Jason> chango they get what they
Hi,
>>"Joey" == Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Joey> Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> dpkg may well have problems with the symlink, so any
>> packages still installing in /usr/doc/ could cause problems
>> with dpkg. Since the move is likely to take a long time, this grand
>> move-in-one-fel
Hi,
>>"Joop" == Joop Stakenborg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Joop> In section 2.1 of the menu policy ( Preferred menu structure )
Joop> under Apps:
Joop> Hammradio should be spelled with one 'm'.
Done. Thanks.
manoj
--
Where the system is concerned, you're not allowed to ask
On 21 Jul 1999, Philip Hands wrote:
> Gordon Matzigkeit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Can somebody remind me again why it's so important to be FHS-compliant
> > on this issue? Why not just change the few /usr/share/doc packages
> > back to /usr/doc,
>
> Because people who want to save dis
Julian Gilbey wrote:
> The dpkg-buildpackage program (and maybe autobuilders as well?) could
> be modified so that after the .deb is built, before anything is signed
> or similar, something like the following is done (within any necessary
> fakeroot-type environment, of course):
This ignores the i
Gordon Matzigkeit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Can somebody remind me again why it's so important to be FHS-compliant
> on this issue? Why not just change the few /usr/share/doc packages
> back to /usr/doc,
Because people who want to save disk space by mounting architecture
independant director
15 matches
Mail list logo
