Re: [proposal] Include list of files created in $HOME as a control file

2003-07-03 Thread Andrew Suffield
On Thu, Jul 03, 2003 at 08:21:42PM -0300, Daniel Ruoso wrote: > This discussion has been started in debian-devel, but as I saw that a > policy change is needed, I'm bringing it to the correct list. > > Proposal: > Include a control file like "conffiles" into the debian package in a > way the d

[proposal] Include list of files created in $HOME as a control file

2003-07-03 Thread Daniel Ruoso
Hi, This discussion has been started in debian-devel, but as I saw that a policy change is needed, I'm bringing it to the correct list. Proposal: Include a control file like "conffiles" into the debian package in a way the dotfiles and directories in user's home directory can be easily relate

Re: Policy for 32-bit uids/gids?

2003-07-03 Thread Joey Hess
Colin Watson wrote: > I'm slightly concerned by how we're going to map onto other systems' > uses of 32-bit uids here, since there will already be some. 0-99 and > 6-64999 were reasonably obvious back in the day, but I don't have a > feel for how big systems are allocating uids now. I would be

Re: Policy for 32-bit uids/gids?

2003-07-03 Thread Steve Langasek
On Thu, Jul 03, 2003 at 04:15:54PM -0500, Gunnar Wolf wrote: > David B Harris dijo [Thu, Jul 03, 2003 at 04:23:03AM -0400]: > > I certainly agree with the general idea, as well as the specific > > proposal of allocating 2^16 UIDs for Samba's idmap usage. > > > > That being said, will Sarge release

Re: Policy for 32-bit uids/gids?

2003-07-03 Thread Gunnar Wolf
David B Harris dijo [Thu, Jul 03, 2003 at 04:23:03AM -0400]: > I certainly agree with the general idea, as well as the specific > proposal of allocating 2^16 UIDs for Samba's idmap usage. > > That being said, will Sarge release with the minimum requisites for the > 2^32 UIDs? If so, I'm happy. But

Re: Policy for 32-bit uids/gids?

2003-07-03 Thread Steve Langasek
On Thu, Jul 03, 2003 at 09:58:12AM +0100, Colin Watson wrote: > On Wed, Jul 02, 2003 at 01:15:09PM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote: > > [Re-sent due to inability to properly address email.] > > Section 10.2 of policy currently describes uid and gid classes covering > > the range of 0-65535. This appe

Re: Policy for 32-bit uids/gids?

2003-07-03 Thread Steve Langasek
On Thu, Jul 03, 2003 at 04:23:03AM -0400, David B Harris wrote: > On Wed, 2 Jul 2003 13:15:09 -0500 > Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Section 10.2 of policy currently describes uid and gid classes covering > > the range of 0-65535. This appears to no longer be comprehensive: on a >

Re: aren't software authors misestimated?

2003-07-03 Thread Sebastian Rittau
On Thu, Jul 03, 2003 at 12:04:20PM +0200, Michele Alessandrini wrote: > Hi, I'm a happy debian user, I really estimate the huge work behind such a > magnificent project. I'd like to express a little doubt about policy (very > humble opinion): it seems like programs authors are considered like >

Re: aren't software authors misestimated?

2003-07-03 Thread Josip Rodin
On Thu, Jul 03, 2003 at 12:04:20PM +0200, Michele Alessandrini wrote: > in debian policy they are called, 2 or 3 times, "upstream authors", like > if maintainers (largely mentioned) were the "main" authors. Actually, no, no harm is meant by mentioning Debian maintainers more than upstream maintain

Bug#199849: unclear recommendation for debconf w/ dpkg-statoverride

2003-07-03 Thread Eduard Bloch
Package: debian-policy Version: 3.5.10.0 Severity: minor Tags: patch I think there is a missleading paragraph in the In the "files" chapter, containing the recommendations for dpkg-statoverride usage. In the particular case, the maintainer must case about how to call debconf and the attached examp

Re: aren't software authors misestimated?

2003-07-03 Thread David B Harris
On Thu, 3 Jul 2003 12:04:20 +0200 Michele Alessandrini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, I'm a happy debian user, I really estimate the huge work behind such a > magnificent project. I'd like to express a little doubt about policy (very > humble opinion): it seems like programs authors are conside

Re: Policy for 32-bit uids/gids?

2003-07-03 Thread Colin Watson
On Wed, Jul 02, 2003 at 01:15:09PM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote: > [Re-sent due to inability to properly address email.] > > Section 10.2 of policy currently describes uid and gid classes covering > the range of 0-65535. This appears to no longer be comprehensive: on a > current system running a 2

aren't software authors misestimated?

2003-07-03 Thread Michele Alessandrini
Hi, I'm a happy debian user, I really estimate the huge work behind such a magnificent project. I'd like to express a little doubt about policy (very humble opinion): it seems like programs authors are considered like "marginal" contributors. Dselect description doesn't even report their info o

Re: Policy for 32-bit uids/gids?

2003-07-03 Thread David B Harris
On Wed, 2 Jul 2003 13:15:09 -0500 Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > [Re-sent due to inability to properly address email.] > > Section 10.2 of policy currently describes uid and gid classes covering > the range of 0-65535. This appears to no longer be comprehensive: on a > current system