Hi,
>>"Karl" == Karl M Hegbloom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Karl> I just updated to the newest version of `debian-policy', and noticed
Karl> that the copyright date is `1998'. Shouldn't that be updated?
--
Debian GNU/Linux
Hi,
>>"Giuliano" == Giuliano Procida <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Giuliano> Has no one seriously considered the mess that will happen
Giuliano> if you try to follow this path (namely, making each package
Giuliano> manage the transition by itself)? Think about all the typos
Giuliano> (like "[-L
Hi,
>>"Joseph" == Joseph Carter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> This way, people would be free to move /var/spool/mail/* to /var/mail/*
>> at their discretion, but this is never done automatically by the system.
Joseph> That was the point of the suggestion. There was actually a
Joseph> bug to
On Tue, Jul 27, 1999 at 01:45:47PM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote:
> If we agree on this, a possible plan would be:
>
> potato:
> Packages reference /var/spool/mail internally.
> base-files creates a symlink /var/mail -> /var/spool/mail
>
> potato+1: Packages reference /var/mail internally.
> *
On Sun, 25 Jul 1999, Joseph Carter wrote:
> [...] My suggestion is
> that we do not move /var/spool/mail on existing systems and instead simply
> create a symlink from /var/mail and call it good. /var/mail should be the
> directory on a new system, though the compatibility symlink should be
> cre
Regarding the share/doc proposal. My apologies if this repeating
someone else's comments, I have not read all the messages in the
threads.
On Fri, Jul 16, 1999 at 02:35:04PM -0700, Joey Hess wrote:
> Usr/share/doc vs. /usr/doc (#40706)
> * Under discussion.
> * Proposed by Manoj Srivastava; se
6 matches
Mail list logo
