Previously Julian Gilbey wrote:
> Agreed. I presume that ldconfig exists on all systems, though.
All systems Debian currently runs on anyway. I kind of expect that to
change at some point though.
> Please explain; I don't know what you mean here.
I'll have to get back to you on that :)
> Are w
Your message dated Thu, 15 Mar 2001 23:35:23 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#89807: packaging-manual still refers to /usr/doc
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 the c
On Thu, Mar 15, 2001 at 01:54:08PM -0300, Henrique M Holschuh wrote:
> Have you noticed you're advocating creating dynamic users in just about
> every machine that ever needs to build a certain package JUST because you
> dislike dpkg-statoverride usage in postinst? It looks like you're trying to
>
>>"Julian" == Julian Gilbey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Julian> On Mon, Mar 12, 2001 at 10:20:49PM -0800, Ben Gertzfield wrote:
>> The man page for dh_suidregister says that any package containing a
>> SUID/SGID binary no longer needs to use suidregister, instead, users
>> can use dpkg-statove
Package: packaging-manual
Version: 3.2.1.0
Severity: normal
$ zgrep usr/doc /usr/doc/packaging-manual/packaging.text.gz
`/usr/doc/copyright/GPL' in the Debian GNU/Linux distribution or on
dpkg --fsys-tarfile .deb | tar xof usr/doc/<\*>copyright | less
file from `/usr/doc//copyr
On Thu, Mar 15, 2001 at 01:40:47PM +0100, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> Previously Julian Gilbey wrote:
> > But what does it mean for a "suggests to take effect"?
>
> (Pre-)Depends, Conflicts and Replaces are the only ones that dpkg
> cares about, the others are for frontends like dselect. A Suggests
Julian Gilbey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> That's probably correct; they function perfectly if everything works,
> but if the postinst ends up being called with an abort-* argument, I'm
> not sure that it would. Any experts out there?
As postinst is always the last thing that dpkg does on a pack
Wichert Akkerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It should say what it currently says.
>> 7.2 Depends: should also mention "or if it is required by the
>> postinst, prerm or postrm scripts".
> Remove postrm from there, that can't rely on the Depends being present.
Is this just "postrm purge" o
On Thu, 15 Mar 2001, Henrique M Holschuh wrote:
> every machine that ever needs to build a certain package JUST because you
> dislike dpkg-statoverride usage in postinst? It looks like you're trying to
That was out of line, and I apologise. Please read "JUST because of a
dislike...", and "looks l
On Thu, 15 Mar 2001, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 15, 2001 at 01:15:37PM +0100, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> > Previously Anthony Towns wrote:
> > > What's special about dynamic u/gids? You just make sure the user/group
> > > exists in the preinst, then let dpkg unpack it to the correct id. No n
Previously Anthony Towns wrote:
> Seems like either fakeroot could be enhanced to handle that, or maybe
> such packages should be restricted to being built with sudo with the
> appropriate checks in debian/rules to ensure that either the user already
> exists, or that running adduser in debian/rule
Previously Julian Gilbey wrote:
> But what does it mean for a "suggests to take effect"?
(Pre-)Depends, Conflicts and Replaces are the only ones that dpkg
cares about, the others are for frontends like dselect. A Suggests
can't really take affect.
>
> > > 7.2 Depends: should also mention "or if
On Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 09:23:06PM +, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 01:29:56PM +0100, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> > Previously Julian Gilbey wrote:
> > > Is there any easy way in which dpkg-statoverride can be modified to
> > > distinguish between local and package overrides, in
On Thu, Mar 15, 2001 at 01:15:37PM +0100, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> Previously Anthony Towns wrote:
> > What's special about dynamic u/gids? You just make sure the user/group
> > exists in the preinst, then let dpkg unpack it to the correct id. No need
> > for statoverrides at all.
> The name of th
Previously Anthony Towns wrote:
> What's special about dynamic u/gids? You just make sure the user/group
> exists in the preinst, then let dpkg unpack it to the correct id. No need
> for statoverrides at all.
The name of the user/group must be used in the data.tar.gz, which can
only happen if the
On Thu, Mar 15, 2001 at 08:18:58PM +1100, Herbert Xu wrote:
> Yes this sentence did exist in the packaging manual, however, there was
> never any explanation of why the postinst script must not call ldconfig if
> $1 isn't set to configure. I don't see any reasons why it shouldn't either
> since by
On Thu, Mar 15, 2001 at 03:00:14AM +0100, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> Previously Julian Gilbey wrote:
> > 7.2 Binary dependencies
> > This section states that "All but Pre-Depends and Conflicts take
> > effect only when a package is to be configured." But actually,
> > dpkg appears to ig
On Thu, Mar 15, 2001 at 12:57:17AM -0800, Joey Hess wrote:
> Herbert Xu wrote:
> > When did this (postinst can only call ldconfig if $1 = configure) become
> > policy? Not only is this pointless, it also means that a lot of packages are
> > now in violation of this policy. I propose that the "and
Herbert Xu wrote:
> When did this (postinst can only call ldconfig if $1 = configure) become
> policy? Not only is this pointless, it also means that a lot of packages are
> now in violation of this policy. I propose that the "and only if" phrase be
> removed from the above sentence.
Er, the text
Package: debian-policy
Version: 3.5.2.0
Julian Gilbey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Package: debian-policy
> Version: 3.5.2.0
> Severity: wishlist
> Proposed patch:
> Any package installing shared libraries in a directory that's listed
> in `/etc/ld.so.conf' or in one of the default lib
20 matches
Mail list logo
