Raphaël Hertzog writes:
> In response to http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=494714
> I would like that the policy be updated to allow the Binary field in
> .dsc and .changes to span over multiple lines.
This would be the first field in .dsc and .changes that would permit
continuati
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org
Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org).
> package debian-policy
Ignoring bugs not assigned to: debian-policy
> tags 533852 - patch
Bug#533852: debian-policy: Allow Binary fie
On Sun, 21 Jun 2009, Raphaël Hertzog wrote:
> --- a/policy.sgml
> +++ b/policy.sgml
> @@ -3276,7 +3276,9 @@ Package: libc6
> commas
> A space after each comma is conventional.
> . Currently the packages must be separated using
> - only spaces in the
Package: debian-policy
Version: 3.8.2.0
Severity: wishlist
Tags: patch
In response to http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=494714 I
would like that the policy be updated to allow the Binary field in .dsc and
.changes to span over multiple lines.
Here's a suggested patch:
--- a/policy.
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org
Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org).
> package debian-policy
Ignoring bugs not assigned to: debian-policy
> tags 514919 = pending
Bug#514919: Removing support for uploads
Raphael Hertzog writes:
> On Fri, 19 Jun 2009, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> Here is an updated patch for stating that the Debian archive doesn't
>> support listing multiple distributions in the *.changes file. This
>> reduces the footnote of distributions to just a couple of examples
>> and defers to
Raphael Hertzog writes:
> On Fri, 19 Jun 2009, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> +Configuration files for window managers and display managers
>> +should be placed in a subdirectory of /etc/X11/
>> +corresponding to the package name due to these programs' tight
>> +integratio
On Fri, 19 Jun 2009, Russ Allbery wrote:
> + Configuration files for window managers and display managers
> + should be placed in a subdirectory of /etc/X11/
> + corresponding to the package name due to these programs' tight
> + integration with the mechanisms of the
On Fri, 19 Jun 2009, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Here is an updated patch for stating that the Debian archive doesn't
> support listing multiple distributions in the *.changes file. This
> reduces the footnote of distributions to just a couple of examples and
> defers to the devref for everything else.
On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 12:47:34PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 02:29:27PM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> > perl is build essential. dpkg-dev depends on it.
>
> dpkg-dev's dependency on perl is an implementation detail, not a guaranteed
> build-essential interface.
That mi
Jonathan Yu writes:
> Anyway, thanks for the clarification Russ. The reason I was wondering
> is because it is noted that field names themselves are
> case-insensitive, so I wasn't sure if the same thing applied for field
> values.
Yeah, that makes sense. I do think it's worth a comment saying
I noticed Russ responded via the archives.. Turns out I wasn't
subscribed to debian-policy before.
Anyway, thanks for the clarification Russ. The reason I was wondering
is because it is noted that field names themselves are
case-insensitive, so I wasn't sure if the same thing applied for field
val
On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 02:29:27PM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> perl is build essential. dpkg-dev depends on it.
dpkg-dev's dependency on perl is an implementation detail, not a guaranteed
build-essential interface.
--
Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Deb
Jonathan Yu writes:
> I was reading the Debian Policy Manual 2.4, which discusses the
> various sections that packages may be classified as. However, I can't
> tell if section names should be lowercase, or if they are
> case-insensitive.
>
> Presumably case shouldn't matter, but I think there sho
Hi everyone:
I was reading the Debian Policy Manual 2.4, which discusses the
various sections that packages may be classified as. However, I can't
tell if section names should be lowercase, or if they are
case-insensitive.
Presumably case shouldn't matter, but I think there should be
clarificati
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org
Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org).
> package debian-policy
Ignoring bugs not assigned to: debian-policy
> tags 525190 = pending
Bug#525190: Drop perl >= 5.6 from (Build-
Russ Allbery writes:
> Bill Allombert writes:
>> I agree that the requirement for >= 5.6.0-16 should be removed but
>> probably the requirement for 'Build-Depends: perl' should be kept ?
>> Or maybe I am missing the big picture ?
> There's earlier text in the same section outside the context ra
On Sat, Jun 20 2009, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Sorry about the long delay on the rewrite of the X installation
> directory section. Here's proposed rewording for the whole section.
> How does this look to everyone?
I was wondering if is it OK not to have a transition period for
this change,
Hi,
On Sat, Jun 20 2009, Russ Allbery wrote:
> diff --git a/policy.sgml b/policy.sgml
> index 43cf4d6..528c4b9 100644
> --- a/policy.sgml
> +++ b/policy.sgml
> @@ -3118,76 +3118,39 @@ Package: libc6
> distribution(s) where this version of the package should
> be installed. Va
Manoj Srivastava writes:
> This is a new rule being introduced as a "SHOULD" level, meaning
> that any packages that are shipping out-of-date alternate language man
> pages are instantly buggy. Are we happy with that?
Personally, I think all such packages are already buggy, regardless
On Fri, Jun 19 2009, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Cyril Brulebois writes:
>
>> From: Cyril Brulebois
>> Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2009 21:40:50 +0200
>> Subject: [PATCH] Drop (build|) dependencies on perl (>= 5.6.0-16).
>>
>> This version of perl is so obsolete that dropping any reference to it
>> makes sense
On Sat, Jun 20 2009, Russ Allbery wrote:
> After reading the thread, I propose the following reduced version of
> this patch. It omits some of the more specific instructions (as
> discussed), which can be covered in the devref, and it also avoids the
> assumption that the original man page is in
Bill Allombert writes:
> I agree that the requirement for >= 5.6.0-16 should be removed but
> probably the requirement for 'Build-Depends: perl' should be kept ?
> Or maybe I am missing the big picture ?
There's earlier text in the same section outside the context range that
requires a dependenc
On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 01:28:23PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 09:03:19PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> > Cyril Brulebois writes:
> >
> > > From: Cyril Brulebois
> > > Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2009 21:40:50 +0200
> > > Subject: [PATCH] Drop (build|) dependencies on perl (>= 5.
On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 09:03:19PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Cyril Brulebois writes:
>
> > From: Cyril Brulebois
> > Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2009 21:40:50 +0200
> > Subject: [PATCH] Drop (build|) dependencies on perl (>= 5.6.0-16).
> >
> > This version of perl is so obsolete that dropping any refer
Hello Russ,
On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 11:19:50PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> After reading the thread, I propose the following reduced version of
> this patch. It omits some of the more specific instructions (as
> discussed), which can be covered in the devref, and it also avoids the
> assumption t
26 matches
Mail list logo
