> Having looked into this a little more, I now think that simple
> misunderstanding may be why this turned into a major debate. The
> original wishlist said something like, "please have dpkg follow
> policy." Of course, what Thomas meant was, "please copy the style
> mentioned in policy for some
On Mon, Feb 14, 2005 at 06:15:34PM +0100, Christian Perrier wrote:
> Quoting Chris Waters ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> > I could say I want guidance from policy on what color of shirt I wear
> > to my next LUG meeting. That doesn't mean it's a matter for policy.
> Well, I'm not sure that irony is the
On Sat, Feb 12, 2005 at 02:21:08AM +0100, Bluefuture wrote:
> Hi Manoj/Debian-policy mailing list,
> I'm the developer of dehs information system [1] that i had also
> integrated with some useful info in the developer qa information
> system[2].
> As you can see from here[3] 6250 not native source
On Mon, 14 Feb 2005 19:30:24 +0100, Adam Heath wrote:
> Does policy enforce output styles elsewhere?
Section 9.4, which is what this discussion was originally about, describes
how initscript output should look.
> Does anything parse the output of these commands?
That, I don't know. I would h
On Mon, Feb 14, 2005 at 04:19:25PM -0200, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> On Mon, 14 Feb 2005, Adam Heath wrote:
> > On Sat, 12 Feb 2005, Bluefuture wrote:
> > > 3. submit with a wishlist (tag patch) bug to BTS.
> >
> > These things shouldn't be filed as bugs, when there are so many. Make a
Quoting Chris Waters ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> On Mon, Feb 14, 2005 at 11:20:19AM +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > No shenanigans here. The dpkg maintainer says that he wants guidance
> > from policy.
>
> I could say I want guidance from policy on what color of shirt I wear
> to my next LUG me
On Mon, 14 Feb 2005, wrote:
> I have no intention of using policy to "beat anyone on the head".
> To repeat, the dpkg maintainer _asked_ for policy guidance. That is
> why he reassigned #254998 to debian-policy. You reassigned it back
> to dpkg on the grounds that there was no "bug" in policy.
On Mon, 14 Feb 2005, Adam Heath wrote:
> On Sat, 12 Feb 2005, Bluefuture wrote:
> > 3. submit with a wishlist (tag patch) bug to BTS.
>
> These things shouldn't be filed as bugs, when there are so many. Make a
It is not an one-go mass-bug filling, since he has to review every watch
file anyway.
On Sat, 12 Feb 2005, Bluefuture wrote:
> 3. submit with a wishlist (tag patch) bug to BTS.
These things shouldn't be filed as bugs, when there are so many. Make a
status page, discuss on -devel, and when the number of packages gets smaller,
then maybe you can file a mass-bug.
--
To UNSUBSCRIB
On Mon, Feb 14, 2005 at 11:20:19AM +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> No shenanigans here. The dpkg maintainer says that he wants guidance
> from policy.
I could say I want guidance from policy on what color of shirt I wear
to my next LUG meeting. That doesn't mean it's a matter for policy.
> H
> Fuck no. You are the one who resorted to bureaucratic
> shennaigans to convince dpkg maintainers to change the way it works,
> rather than trying and convince them that your way is right.
No shenanigans here. The dpkg maintainer says that he wants guidance
from policy. He wrote:
Ac
I wrote:
> One case where /usr/bin/which won't work is in initscripts that
> run prior to /etc/rcS.d/S45mountnfs.sh.
This problem is solved by debianutils version 2.12.0, uploaded yesterday,
which moves which from /usr/bin/ to /bin/. See #295058. :)
--
Thomas
Hood
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email
12 matches
Mail list logo
