Package: debian-policy
Version: 3.6.1.1
Priority: wishlist
Tags: patch
[ Note: I understand that this status suggestion is covered (without a
valid example in #208010) but I believe that LSB compliance also forces
some other things (like exit codes) which is still under discussion.
That's why I'm
Hi this is Chrissy emailing backa friend of the website gave me your email
a few weeks ago...I'm usually online everyday so we can chat and maybe we could
hook up after as well considering we live pretty close...Anyways, hope to hear
from you soon cuz my husband will be out of town most of n
On Tue, Jan 18, 2005 at 10:48:57AM +0100, Thomas Hood wrote:
> sequence of commands which illustrate that "command -v foo" prints
> the name of the first executable file "foo" it finds on the PATH,
> failing which it prints the first non-executable file "foo" it finds
> on the PATH. What sense doe
Package: debian-policy
Version: 3.6.1.1
Severity: minor
Section 9.3.3.2 gives this as an example of how to check for the
availability of invoke-rc.d:
>if command -v invoke-rc.d >/dev/null 2>&1; then
1. It would be helpful to mention that "command -v" is not POSIX and
that therefore, to be
(cc:ed to #218530)
Guilherme de S. Pastore wrote to #289732:
> The attached patches make your maintainer scripts behave just like a
> package using debhelper would
The patch makes use of "which". The problem with "which" is supposed to
be that it is in /usr/bin/ and (as Ian Jackson wrote in #21
5 matches
Mail list logo
