> On Thu, Nov 02, 2000 at 09:16:02AM -0500, Brian White wrote:
> > -
> > Most people setting up a web site expect /cgi-bin/ to be available for
> > scripts on their site. Unfortunately, Debian uses this for those scripts
> > packages that get installed. These two need to be independant.
> >
>
On Thu, 02 Nov 2000, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 02, 2000 at 10:43:34AM -0500, Mark Rahner wrote:
> > I'm just a lurker (at this point) and I'm not out to make work for anyone so
> > take my comments for what they're worth. In answer to your question, I'm a
> > big
> > fan of extreme cl
On Thu, 02 Nov 2000, T.Pospisek's MailLists wrote:
> I absolutely don't understand why you want to introduce a "maybe" restart
> instead of sanely defining the semantics of the "existing" restart and
> correctly implementing it.
Because redefining restart is not possible in practice. It is as simp
On Thu, Nov 02, 2000 at 09:16:02AM -0500, Brian White wrote:
> -
> Most people setting up a web site expect /cgi-bin/ to be available for
> scripts on their site. Unfortunately, Debian uses this for those scripts
> packages that get installed. These two need to be independant.
>
> As such, D
Julian Gilbey wrote:
> Wrong: -f dereferences symlinks and says whether the final destination
> is a normal file. That's what you want:
Ok, change accepted.
--
see shy jo
On Thu, Nov 02, 2000 at 10:43:34AM -0500, Mark Rahner wrote:
> I'm just a lurker (at this point) and I'm not out to make work for anyone so
> take my comments for what they're worth. In answer to your question, I'm a
> big
> fan of extreme clarity. I think the three extra characters are well wor
On Thu, 2 Nov 2000, Henrique M Holschuh wrote:
> On Thu, 02 Nov 2000, Mark Rahner wrote:
> > Henrique M Holschuh wrote:
> > > maybe-restart means exectly that: restart only if currently running.
> >
> > I had been wondering about this. It's a shame this isn't called
> > restart-if-running.
I ab
Henrique M Holschuh wrote:
> [-policy added to CC: list]
>
> On Thu, 02 Nov 2000, Mark Rahner wrote:
> > Henrique M Holschuh wrote:
> > > maybe-restart means exectly that: restart only if currently running.
> >
> > I had been wondering about this. It's a shame this isn't called
> > restart-if-run
On Thu, Nov 02, 2000 at 08:29:05AM +, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> > > Package: packaging-manual
> > >
> > > Packaging Manual 4.2.14 treats stable, unstable, contrib and non-free
> > > as "Distributions", which is no longer true for contrib and non-free.
> > >
> > > sources.list(5) calls main, cont
Now that there is some time to make changes before the next release,
can we look at this idea again. It's really a pretty simple idea
that would save some headaches for professional webmaster. Most
people have said they thought it was a good idea. It just needs to
go through the final steps of b
[-policy added to CC: list]
On Thu, 02 Nov 2000, Mark Rahner wrote:
> Henrique M Holschuh wrote:
> > maybe-restart means exectly that: restart only if currently running.
>
> I had been wondering about this. It's a shame this isn't called
> restart-if-running.
Well, I am not the author of 'maybe
On Tue, Oct 31, 2000 at 04:04:32PM +0100, Josip Rodin wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 31, 2000 at 11:59:02AM +0100, Marc Haber wrote:
> > Package: packaging-manual
> > Version: 3.1.1.1
> > Severity: normal
> >
> > Packaging Manual 4.2.14 treats stable, unstable, contrib and non-free
> > as "Distributions", w
On Wed, Nov 01, 2000 at 09:14:05AM -0800, Joey Hess wrote:
> Julian Gilbey wrote:
> > I (very belatedly) second this proposal.
>
> Thanks. I think I have enough seconds now, don't really remember.
>
> > There's one small change I would make though; see below.
>
> > > + if [ -e /etc/default
On Wed, Nov 01, 2000 at 02:07:00PM -0200, Henrique M Holschuh wrote:
> I've better defined the restart issue, and added maybe-restart to the policy
> text. I also wrote the 'start-rc.d' script (although I called it
> invoke-rc.d). All this stuff was sent to this list two days ago for
> comments, be
On Tue, Oct 31, 2000 at 10:10:13AM -0600, Steve Greenland wrote:
> Generally very nice (haven't read the actual scripts yet...). I definitely
> approve.
>
> I've one question/concern/objection, though. In your diff of 3.3.3.2, you
> have:
>
>
> > + By default, `invoke-rc.d' will pass any act
At Thu, 02 Nov 2000 17:05:42 +0900,
Masato Taruishi wrote:
> > though - and support for patches agausnt multiple versions of a kernel (as
> > demonstrated by kernel-patches-kdb.
>
> dh_installkernelpatch -m "2.2.14 2.2.15 2.2.16" installs the patch
At Thu, 2 Nov 2000 08:52:32 +0100,
Yann Dirson wrote:
> > I've already wirtten a dh_installkernelpatch debhelper program,
> > and now uses it in kernel-patch-pc9800 as a test.
>
> Got a look at the kernel-patch-pc9800 source. You didn't include the
> dh_installkernelpatch script, and there is no
On Thu, Nov 02, 2000 at 10:52:31AM +0900, Masato Taruishi wrote:
> At Wed, 1 Nov 2000 23:17:07 +0100,
> Yann Dirson wrote:
>
> > As of now, I don't think a single patch package (including mines)
> > behaves correctly in all these areas. I have started a
> > `debhelper'-like script to help in this
On Thu, Nov 02, 2000 at 10:52:31AM +0900, Masato Taruishi wrote:
> At Wed, 1 Nov 2000 23:17:07 +0100,
> Yann Dirson wrote:
>
> > As of now, I don't think a single patch package (including mines)
> > behaves correctly in all these areas. I have started a
> > `debhelper'-like script to help in this
19 matches
Mail list logo
