Andrew Suffield wrote:
> Not quite; it should be modified to explicitly exclude
> debhelper. There are very few packages which are actually needed at
> clean time - the warning is correct for most things.
That does not agree with what Wouter said.
Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> When build-depends were
On Wed, Sep 03, 2003 at 09:20:15PM +0200, Martin Godisch wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 03, 2003 at 17:44:49 +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > > + 7
> > > + program is not running,
> >
> > This one will break removing and upgrading packages; dpkg checks the
> > exit code of maintainer scripts, a
At 8:49 am, Thursday, September 4 2003, Andrew Suffield mumbled:
> Not quite; it should be modified to explicitly exclude
> debhelper. There are very few packages which are actually needed at
> clean time - the warning is correct for most things.
>
Noted. The check in question now doesn't moan i
On Wed, Sep 03, 2003 at 03:43:06PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> FWIW, here's linda's rationalle for its warning:
>
> W: apt-src; Package has Build-Depends, but builds no arch-dependant packages.
> Package being checked declares Build-Depends, but does not actually build
> any architecture-dependant
Op wo 03-09-2003, om 18:27 schreef Joey Hess:
[...]
> Therefore it seemed to me that I should change the dozen or so arch all
> pacages I maintain to put debhelper in the build-depends (and generally
> everything in the build-depends for most of them since the split is
> useless unless the package
Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> This has led to the confusion that people thought build-depends were
> intended for arch-dependent packages *only*. That isn't true.
> Build-depends should contain build-dependencies that are common to
> arch-independent and arch-dependent packages, as well as
> build-depen
This is a nit, but I think 'status' should be in the example help text, too:
> echo "Usage: /etc/init.d/bind {start|stop|restart|reload|force-reload}" >&2
echo "Usage: /etc/init.d/bind
{start|stop|restart|reload|force-reload|status}" >&2
Joey Hess wrote:
> If build-depends-indep need not be satified any time the clean target is
> run, then I can imagine that some tool might be written to rely on that,
> and only install the build-depends before building a package that is
> only arch: all.
Rather, that some tool remove the build-de
A strict reading of policy now indicates that Build-Depends-Indep need
not ever be satisfied when the clean target is called. Apparently this
change was made to document autobuilder behavior when building packages
that mix arch all and arch any components, but as I read it, the effect
is broader.
On Wed, Sep 03, 2003 at 09:57:46AM +0200, Martin Godisch wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Andrew, Wouter, Steve, do your objections still apply to the current
> revision (attached below)?
I'm still not comfortable with it, albeit in a different way.
[...]
>
> + In the case of init script comman
On Wed, Sep 03, 2003 at 01:55:45AM +0200, Denis Barbier wrote:
> > This is a copout. If the field is not supposed to have non
> > ascii characters (since the tool chain can not yet handle them), then
> > policy should not be specifying the encoding of these illegal
> > characters.
>
> Wro
On Wed, Sep 03, 2003 at 06:41:31AM +0200, Andrei Mitrofanow wrote:
> i think in /etc/menu-methods i dont shall make *.h executable.
> onliy no header files shall be executable.
Could you be more specific ?
The only `*.h' file in /etc/menu-methods is menu.h and is not shipped
executable. It is not
This one seems okay. Seconded as amended.
On Wed, Sep 03, 2003 at 09:57:46AM +0200, Martin Godisch wrote:
> Andrew, Wouter, Steve, do your objections still apply to the current
> revision (attached below)?
> +++ debian-policy-3.6.1.0/policy.sgml 2003-09-02 06:53:48.0 +0200
> @@ -5362,13 +
i think in /etc/menu-methods i dont shall make *.h executable.
onliy no header files shall be executable.
Andrei
14 matches
Mail list logo
