Bug#85500: PROPOSED] please strengthen section 2.3.8.1's stance on messages in postinsts

On Sat, Feb 10, 2001 at 09:42:30AM -0800, Sean Perry wrote: > The problem is here is the definition of 'vitallly important'. Numerous > packages print information during their postinst runs. When one installs many > packages at once, the information is lost as the next postinst prints its > info

Bug#83977: PROPOSED] include Perl Policy

On Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 03:06:11PM +1100, Brendan O'Dea wrote: > Package: debian-policy > Severity: wishlist > > I've revised the perl-policy document to reflect the changes in > packaging of both perl and modules and would like to see this document > incorporated into debian-policy proper rather

Processed: change submitter

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > close 85500 Bug#85500: [PROPOSED] please strengthen section 2.3.8.1's stance on messages in postinsts Bug closed, send any further explanations to Sean Perry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > close 85501 Bug#85501: typo in policy process chapter 3 Bug closed, sen

Bug#85514: more policy 6.5 grammar / typo issues

Package: debian-policy Version: 3.5.0.0 Severity: minor -- quote If a version the package is already installed, call -- end quote seems to be missing an 'of'. -- quote A directory will never be replaced by a symbolic links -- end quote links should singular --quote Any packages all of whose fil

Bug#85511: policy 6.5 grammar issue

Package: debian-policy Version: 3.5.0.0 Severity: minor 6.5 In each case if an error occurs the actions in are general run backwards -- end quote not sure what the author meant here. I suspect 'in are' is transposed and should 'are in'. -- System Information Debian Release: testing/unstable Arc

Processed: change submitter

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > close 88501 Bug number 88501 not found. > close 85497 Bug#85497: typo in policy manual Bug closed, send any further explanations to Sean Perry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > close 85599 Bug number 85599 not found. > reopen 88501 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Bug number 8

Bug#85510: policy 6.1 typo

Package: debian-policy Version: 3.5.0.0 Severity: minor 6.1 They should be readable and executable to anyone, and not world-writable. the package management system looks at the exit status from these scripts. -- end quote The second sentence should begin with a capital letter. -- System Inform

Bug#85508: policy 5.2 has an unclear sentence

Package: debian-policy Version: 3.5.0.0 Severity: minor 5.2 It is important to understand that the DEB_*_ARCH string does only determine which Debian architecture we build on resp. for. -- end quote The English of this sentence is very poor. 'does only determine' and expecially 'we build on resp.

Bug#85506: policy 5.2 does not say that binary-indep must be non-interactive

Package: debian-policy Version: 3.5.0.0 Severity: minor 5.2 Since an interactive debian/rules script makes it impossible to auto-compile that package and also makes it hard for other people to reproduce the same binary package, all required targets MUST be non-interactive. At a minimum, required t

Bug#85505: policy section 4.0, upstream-version is poorly worded

Package: debian-policy Version: 3.5.0.0 Severity: minor Chapter 4: upstream-version It is usually version number of the original (`upstream') package of which the .deb file has been made, if this is applicable. -- end quote a) between usually and version a 'the' should be added b) 'of which' sho

Bug#85503: section 3.1 of policy is confused

Package: debian-policy Version: 3.5.0.0 Severity: normal 3.1: When writing the control files for Debian packages you must read the Debian policy manual in conjunction with the details below and the list of fields for the particular file. -- end quote 'must read the Debian policy manual', but I

Bug#85504: grammar issue in policy 3.2.1

Package: debian-policy Version: 3.5.0.0 Severity: normal 3.2.1: The use lowercase package names is strongly recommended --end quote perhaps an 'of' should be added? -- System Information Debian Release: testing/unstable Architecture: i386 Kernel: Linux geisha 2.2.18pre11 #1 SMP Mon Oct 2 17:40:3

Bug#85501: typo in policy process chapter 3

Package: debian-policy Version: 3.5.0.0 Severity: minor flush out old proposal after a a suuficiently long period of time There should be one 'u' and two 'f's in sufficiently. -- System Information Debian Release: testing/unstable Architecture: i386 Kernel: Linux one 2.4.0 #1 Fri Jan 5 22:24:46

Bug#85500: [PROPOSED] please strengthen section 2.3.8.1's stance on messages in postinsts

Package: debian-policy Version: 3.5.0.0 Severity: wishlist 2.3.8.1 states: If a package has a vitally important piece of information to pass to the user (such as "don't run me as I am, you must edit the following configuration files first or you risk your system emitting badly-formatted messages"

Bug#85497: typo in policy manual

Package: debian-policy Version: 3.5.0.0 Severity: minor 2.3.8: You should not use dpkg-divert' on either a ' is missing or the one that is there should not be. -- System Information Debian Release: testing/unstable Architecture: i386 Kernel: Linux one 2.4.0 #1 Fri Jan 5 22:24:46 PST 2001 i686

Bug#85270: PROPOSAL] Forbiding debian-revision field for Debian-native source packages

> "Wichert" == Wichert Akkerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Wichert> Previously Brian May wrote: >> ...and why is an empty diff file, for a small (if not tiny) >> number of packages such a problem? Wichert> It's impractical. The way I use version numbers is that I Wichert>

Bug#85270: PROPOSAL] Forbiding debian-revision field for Debian-native source packages

On Fri, Feb 09, 2001 at 03:20:06PM +0100, Wichert Akkerman wrote: > Previously Henrique M Holschuh wrote: > > Well, it's either that or change the build tools... either by adding a flag > > to the control file, or by changing dpkg-buildpackage to refuse to build a > > native package (abort and comp