On 19 Sep 2002 17:02:24 -0600
Georg Lehner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It is my opinion, that all sh-scripts involved in the standard system
> should be posix-sh compatible _and_ that the selection of the /bin/sh
> symlink should be realized by the alternative-mecanism instead of
> diverting.
I
Indeed!
El jue, 19-09-2002 a las 10:28, Clint Adams escribió:
> > /bin/sh is a symlink to /bin/bash. Shouldn't it be an alternative so I
> > can make ash or any other compliant, but smaller shall the default (and
> > thus save memory and CPU requirements)?!
[...stripped explanation about what is
> > > What would y'all think about having cgi-bin managed more like, umm:
> > > /usr/lib/cgi-bin/
> > >
> > > ~wwwdata/cgi-bin/
> > > > > postinst,
> > > based on some setting in /etc/ somewhere>
> > This has how I've done my site,
> /bin/sh is a symlink to /bin/bash. Shouldn't it be an alternative so I
> can make ash or any other compliant, but smaller shall the default (and
> thus save memory and CPU requirements)?!
The problem is that various people like to claim that policy is either
irrelevant or that it means somethin
On Thu, Sep 19, 2002 at 09:50:16AM -0600, Georg Lehner wrote:
> BTW:
>
> /bin/sh is a symlink to /bin/bash. Shouldn't it be an alternative so I
> can make ash or any other compliant, but smaller shall the default (and
> thus save memory and CPU requirements)?!
/usr/share/doc/bash/README.Debian.g
BTW:
El jue, 19-09-2002 a las 01:28, Clint Adams escribió:
...
> You may wish to restrict your script to POSIX features when possible
> so that it may use `/bin/sh' as its interpreter. If your script works
> with `ash', it's probably POSIX compliant, but if you are in doubt,
>
On Thu, Sep 19, 2002 at 11:26:54AM -0400, Brian White wrote:
> > What would y'all think about having cgi-bin managed more like, umm:
> > /usr/lib/cgi-bin/
> >
> > ~wwwdata/cgi-bin/
> > > postinst,
> > based on some setting in /etc/
> > > Perhaps things have changed in the last 3 years, and they
> > > shall understand that post the /usr/doc issue policy has become more
> > > conservative?
> > I'm afraid I don't understand what you mean here.
>
> He means the best way to get something in policy is for it to be
> impl
On Thu, Sep 19, 2002 at 10:12:29AM -0400, Brian White wrote:
> > Perhaps things have changed in the last 3 years, and they
> > shall understand that post the /usr/doc issue policy has become more
> > conservative?
> I'm afraid I don't understand what you mean here.
He means the best way
> Brian> Once it becomes official policy, then I can get them to make the
> Brian> necessary changes. And once the webservers begin to change over,
> Brian> then I can get the packages to change.
>
> Perhaps things have changed in the last 3 years, and they
> shall understand that pos
On Thu, 2002-09-19 at 15:20, Miquel van Smoorenburg wrote:
> Perhaps MTA and MUA config should be seperate. It would surely be
> less confusing. The MTA has nothing to do with 'draft', 'sent' etc.
> That is a MUA issue.
>
> Maybe /etc/default/inbox for the MTA, and /etc/default/mailbox
> for the
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> 2. "defaultdelivery" is to generic. Delivery of what?
>>
>> How about /etc/default/mailbox
>
>># Format (Maildir, MH, mbox, mbx)
>>INBOX_FORMAT=Maildir
>
>Ok.
>
>What is mbx?
It's an indexed mbox, used by wu-imapd. Exim has su
Clint Adams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Package: debian-policy
> Version: 3.5.7.0
> Severity: normal
>
> In 11.4:
>
> You may wish to restrict your script to POSIX features when possible
> so that it may use `/bin/sh' as its interpreter. If your script works
> with `ash', it's proba
Package: debian-policy
Version: 3.5.7.0
Severity: normal
In 11.4:
You may wish to restrict your script to POSIX features when possible
so that it may use `/bin/sh' as its interpreter. If your script works
with `ash', it's probably POSIX compliant, but if you are in doubt,
use
14 matches
Mail list logo
