Debian Bug Tracking System wrote:
> Why? Policy does not contain the faulty text. The debconf
> specification is not in policy.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/doc/debian-policy>ls debconf*
debconf_specification.htmldebconf_specification.xml.tar.gz
debconf_specification.txt.gz
What's this then?
Your message dated Sat, 09 Feb 2002 21:02:29 -0600
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#133030: debian-policy: debconf policy (specification)
implies dpkg will run .config before preinst ALWAYS
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim
>>"Jason" == Jason Gunthorpe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> nowhere. The state of the machine is still unknown. As a cracker, the
>> minute I replace ssh, I'll go and change the file list (as you said,
>> maybe easy to compute). No signature, heh heh. No packages file
>> anymore. heh heh.
J
ìë
íì¸ì...ì¬ì
ì ë°ììì
ëë¤.
ì ë§ ì¤ë ìë²½ì ëì¨ ì´í¹ê¸ ì ê·ì ë³´ì
ëë¤..
ëëª
ë§ ëª¨ì¼ë©´ 50ë§ìì 주ë ê³³ì
ëë¤. ë¯¿ê¸°ì§ ìì¼ìë©´ ìë를 ë³´ì¸ì..
ì ë ë²ì¨ ì¤íë íì§ ìì ìíì í
ì¤í¸ë§ì¼í
ìì ë²ì¨ 1
Your message dated 09 Feb 2002 15:24:46 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#133096: policy is unclear about Build-Depends etc. case
sensitivity.
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If t
Package: debian-policy
Version: 3.5.6.0
Policy states that there is a
Build-Depends field in the control file.
However, many packages use "Build-depends".
Most tools ignore the case, it might be helpful to clarify this point in
the policy.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] : Junichi Uekawa http://www
On Fri, 08 Feb 2002, Joey Hess wrote:
> Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> > Please document this, it may save someone a grave bug someday, and maybe
> > even avoid a lot of headaches.
>
> Does it really need to be documented in policy? debconf-devel(8)
Well, one need not document that in polic
7 matches
Mail list logo
