I think at this point we really need someone from the dpkg team to tell us
what Policy needs to be saying here. This feels like one of those cases
where the best thing to do is just document what dpkg promises to do,
rather than trying to make dpkg match what Policy might be saying. I'd
like to h
On Sat, 2009-02-14 at 22:59 +0100, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> As far as I know, the archive maps uploads to testing to
> testing-proposed-updates, and so both end up in t-p-u.
That's correct. The s-p-u and t-p-u uploads I've made for devscripts
all had either "stable" or "testing" in the changelog.
Ad
Kurt Roeckx writes:
> As far as I know, the archive maps uploads to testing to
> testing-proposed-updates, and so both end up in t-p-u.
Yeah, but t-p-u is the recommended method, IIRC.
> There is also testing-security, which first gets uploaded to
> security-master.debian.org and then also gets
On Sat, Feb 14, 2009 at 12:19:46PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
>
> I now have:
>
> + The testing distribution normally receives
> + its packages via the unstable distribution
> + after a short time lag. However sometimes, such as
> +
On Sat, Feb 14, 2009 at 09:50:49PM +0100, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 14, 2009 at 12:16:16PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> >
> > I think this is another aspect of the same point above? My understanding
> > from the discussion and the clarified text that Raphael sent is that
> > postrm can alw
On Sat, 2009-02-14 at 12:19 -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> I now have:
>
> + The testing distribution normally receives
> + its packages via the unstable distribution
> + after a short time lag. However sometimes, such as
> + d
On Sat, Feb 14, 2009 at 12:16:16PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Kurt Roeckx writes:
>
> >> +If there is a circular dependency among packages being installed
> >> +or removed, installation or removal order honoring the
> >> +dependency order is impossible, requiring the dependency loop
"Adam D. Barratt" writes:
> That section sounds slightly strange to me. It starts by saying that
> one cannot upload directly to testing, and finishes by indicating that a
> distribution of t-p-u is used to upload directly to testing.
>
> Maybe something like
>
> + before the uns
Kurt Roeckx writes:
>> + If there is a circular dependency among packages being installed
>> + or removed, installation or removal order honoring the
>> + dependency order is impossible, requiring the dependency loop be
>> + broken at some point and the dependency requirements
On Fri, 2009-02-13 at 19:20 -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Here's a proposed patch that limits the footnote to only discussing the
> values that go into *.changes files, removes extraneous information about
> the relative risk of unstable vs. testing, and mentions the other values
> commonly seen in
On Thu, 2009-02-12 at 19:35 +, Mark Hymers wrote:
> In gmane.linux.debian.devel.policy, you wrote:
> > I think it's worth mentioning in the policy footnote that the Debian
> > archive doesn't (well, won't, to be entirely accurate) support the
> > feature and removing the suggestion that there i
> + If there is a circular dependency among packages being installed
> + or removed, installation or removal order honoring the
> + dependency order is impossible, requiring the dependency loop be
> + broken at some point and the dependency requirements violated
> + fo
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> # Fix to refer to a released version
> notfound 514919 3.8.1.0
Bug#514919: Removing support for uploads to multiple distributions
Bug no longer marked as found in version 3.8.1.0.
> found 514919 3.8.0.1
Bug#514919: Removing support for uploads to
13 matches
Mail list logo
