On Thu, 30 Mar 2000, Mark Baker wrote:
> They probably should be group adm, though.
I would like that, it is annoying to have to add all the admin people to
all sorts of groups (with unknown other repercussions) just so they can
read logs.
I think group adm should allow the reading of most, if
On Wed, Mar 29, 2000 at 02:41:44PM +0200, Josip Rodin wrote:
> > Files created by root inside /var/log would be root.adm by default, not
> > root.root by default.
>
> I agree, that would be quite useful. Most of the files in there are already
> set up that way, but some aren't, and that makes peo
Your message dated Thu, 30 Mar 2000 12:18:47 +0100
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line /usr/local/man -> /usr/local/share/man
has caused the Debian Bug report #61058,
regarding FHS: /usr/local/share/man instead of /usr/local/man ?
to be marked as having been forwarded to the upstre
On Wed, 29 Mar 2000, Steve Greenland wrote:
> It's already in violation of policy. From section 4.7.3:
>
> "The other way to do it is to via the maintainer scripts. In this case,
> the configuration file must not be listed as a conffile and must not be
> part of the package distribution."
> [...]
> The following proposal tries to address cases like Bug #34294.
>
> \begin{proposal}
> Do not initialize a text database by using the conffile mechanism.
> \end{proposal}
>
> Rationale: We should try to reduce prompting to a minimum during upgrades.
> 99,999% users will always say "No" to dpkg p
5 matches
Mail list logo
