On Fri 29 Oct 1999, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> Previously Christian Hammers wrote:
> > I propose to make a short note to the developers-reference or
> > debian-policy telling the developers that they should take care
> > of this or even forcing lintian to print warnings if scripts
> > are not prefi
I feel ashamed.
My initial draft for the build-dependency specification - which
was carefully put together after a period of experimentation and
checking of prior art - did not include the architecture specifications
("[!i386]"). It was added very late in the process after Marcus
Brinkmann and Jo
On Tue, Nov 09, 1999 at 11:11:29AM +0100, Trek Star wrote:
> I think that debian must have an UNOFFICIAL area only for distribute
> debian software/contributions/links made by UNAUTHORIZED debian persons
> for all the people that want know/test/make officially this software. The
> scope of this are
Umm, you seem to have crossposted to lots of places... Let's put this just
in debian-policy, and I'll send a short note to the other lists to bring the
discussion here. I see most of this as a policy discussion, so here it will
be.
If any developer has an objection to this, I'll gladly move else
>
> Date:Tue, 09 Nov 1999 11:11:29 +0100
> To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org, debian-policy@lists.debian.org,
>debian-vote@lists.debian.org, debian-www@lists.debian.org,
>debian-project@lists.debian.org
> From:Trek Star <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Making a NEW area
On Fri, 5 Nov 1999, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> > >After having had some dealings with this person on openprojects, I
> > >would recommend a thorough examination of the package he (I'm
> > >assuming it's a he - there is no name anywhere) is 'donating' to the
> > >project.
> >i think that there are
Josip Rodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> And if we choose "Apps/Browser", then we could add all those 15 web browsers
> to it :) to share the load with "Apps/Net".
I like Apps/Browser. In fact, I proposed just that a while back, but
that was before the menu policy re-org, and I ran up against t
Lately more and more text packages are adding X extensions.
Quite often these are useless or even counter-intuitive (taking
mouse control focus in vim inside of an Xterm, for instance)
Since for most of these packages the X support is a hack or kludge,
it really should be kept seperate. vim is
>Looking in the FHS 2.0 /var/lib isn't even mentioned; I thought
>this was one of the differences between FSSTD and FHS; however none
>of /var/cache, /var/spool or /var/state seem at all appropriate for
>the boot images.
/var/lib became /var/state in FHS 2.0. That's reverting to /
9 matches
Mail list logo
