packaging manual is a little unclear. When do I call ldconfig? It is clear
that I should call it only for the configure case in my postinst script. But
do I call it at all in my pre/postrm scripts? The manual simply says to be
sure not to call it for the upgrade case.
On Thu, Oct 05, 2000 at 10:52:46AM +0200, Josip Rodin wrote:
> Using install-sh while /usr/bin/install exists just wastes
> time/resources of people who recompile (think 6 build daemons), I
> don't see why shouldn't Policy recommend a more rational method.
Maybe.
Potential problems:
[1] This pol
[ I sent this message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] before, but
there was no reaction ... ]
Its OK how it is now. Virtual-packages-list.txt doesn't need to
be changed.
- Forwarded message from Marcus Brinkmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -
Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2000 18:34:56 +0200
From: Marcus Brinkmann <[EM
Your message dated Wed, 4 Oct 2000 22:26:02 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#66535: s/linux-kernel-log-daemon/kernel-log-daemon/g
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not th
On Wed, Oct 04, 2000 at 02:39:26PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Josip> NB mentioning /usr/bin/install in Policy would be good also
> Josip> because some lame configure scripts may not be using it,
> Josip> instead they'll be using the supplied install-sh
> Josip> script. That's compatible w
Yves Arrouye <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Package: debian-policy
> Version: 3.2.1.0
> Section 4.1 of the policy manual says to build after setting
> INSTALL = install
> In addition to the fact that the example should use INSTALL_PROGRAM because
> of the strip example later in this section, the v
>>"Josip" == Josip Rodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Josip> NB mentioning /usr/bin/install in Policy would be good also
Josip> because some lame configure scripts may not be using it,
Josip> instead they'll be using the supplied install-sh
Josip> script. That's compatible with every Unix-like
>>"Yves" == Yves Arrouye <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Yves> Section 4.1 of the policy manual says to build after setting
The policy also explicitly states it is a mere example, and
does not, by any means decree that usage.
Yves> INSTALL = install
Yves> In addition to the fact that th
On Thu, 5 Oct 2000 at 02:11, Branden Robinson wrote about "Re: Priorities":
> Because Ian Jackson, who originally authored that language, likes TeX and
> Emacs, but hates X. Our present definition of "standard" has everything to
> do with his personal preferences.
Well, then maybe it's time to c
On Thu, Oct 05, 2000 at 05:27:21AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> I know a lot of people are annoyed by tetex and emacs being standard
> priority, and I personally find it odd that X isn't "standard" these
> days, especially since it's "more of a piece of infrastructure than an
> application".
Beca
10 matches
Mail list logo
