>
> Good point, but it's still a question. In fact adding debconf support
> raises the interesting question - what severity should the question be -
> critical?
>
> The package I'm maintaining (tpctl) adds /dev/thinkpad (root.root
> 0660) and so "low" would seem more appropriate - in fact not as
On Wed, Jul 19, 2000 at 11:40:10 -0700 (+), Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote:
>
> On 18-Jul-2000 Adrian Bridgett wrote:
> > Debian policy says:
> > 4.6. Device files
> > -
> > No package may include device files in the package file tree.
> >
> > If a package needs any special device
Ben Collins wrote:
>
> That makes sense, but doesn't sound like a good idea to me. People would
> start removing debconf after every upgrade, only to redownload and install
> it the next time that upgrade. This goes for several other packages
> aswell. Probably, if this is ever implemented, then i
On 18-Jul-2000 Adrian Bridgett wrote:
> Debian policy says:
> 4.6. Device files
> -
> No package may include device files in the package file tree.
>
> If a package needs any special device files that are not included in the
> base system, it has to call `makedev' in the `postinst
On Wed, Jul 19, 2000 at 11:44:33AM -0400, Ben Collins wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 19, 2000 at 11:00:31AM -0400, Gopal Narayanan wrote:
> > While we are on the topic of items to add to debian/control, I would
> > like to suggest
> >
> > * Install-Depends
> >
> > This field could be used to specify packag
On Mon, 17 Jul 2000, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> Previously Adam Heath wrote:
> > Is this created in debian/control by the maintainer, or should it be
> > inserted
> > at package build time by an automated tool? Indeed, couldn't all fields be
> > inserted at package build time?
>
> Right now in d
> > * Origin
> > This lists the origin of a package. For all Debian packages this should
> > be `Debian'.
> > * Submit-Bugs-To
> > An mailto URL to which bugs should be submitted. (It's a URL so
> > we can support other types of BTSes at a later date if needed)
> > * Submit-Bugs-Style
> >
Debian policy says:
4.6. Device files
-
No package may include device files in the package file tree.
If a package needs any special device files that are not included in the
base system, it has to call `makedev' in the `postinst' script, after asking
the user for permission to do
On Wed, Jul 19, 2000 at 11:00:31AM -0400, Gopal Narayanan wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 16, 2000 at 01:32:26PM -0400, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> > Package: packaging-manual
> >
> > I'm adding three new fields to debian/control:
> >
> > * Origin
> > This lists the origin of a package. For all Debian pac
On Sun, Jul 16, 2000 at 01:32:26PM -0400, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> Package: packaging-manual
>
> I'm adding three new fields to debian/control:
>
> * Origin
> This lists the origin of a package. For all Debian packages this should
> be `Debian'.
> * Submit-Bugs-To
> An mailto URL to whi
> If it turns out to be generally useful, should we not
> at least consider building it in, rahter than asking everyone to hack
> their own variant? I think that the Origin is corelated to the BTS,
> and the BTS is trongly related to the style, and this should be
> reflected in the implem
On Mon, Jul 17, 2000 at 12:31:10PM +0100, Edward Betts wrote:
> Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Our Xaw-replacement handling is seriously pathological in every sense of
> > the term.
> >
> > This will no longer be a concern in woody. With XFree86 4.0.1, libXaw is
> > coming out of
On Mon, Jul 17, 2000 at 05:59:02PM -0600, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Jul 2000, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> > Even if Corel or Stormix ship a Debian package, it is still *our*
> > package and we are responsible for it. So we should also get the
> > bugreports.
[...]
> Can you imagine how badl
On Mon, Jul 17, 2000 at 02:33:34PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> Successor-Of:
> As far as I know, a package isn't upgraded if it's name has changed
> (e.g. fvwm2 -> fvwm or cdgrab -> abcde). This field is meant for this case
> (the new package is "Successor-Of" the old package). There must't be more
On Mon, Jul 17, 2000 at 01:37:17PM -0400, Clint Adams wrote:
> What? Why would anyone want a proliferation of packages that are identical
> except for one control field? If Plagiarism GNU+Linux wants to take my
> package, modify nothing except the control file, what purpose does it serve
> to hav
15 matches
Mail list logo
