Bug#571776: document symbols

Hi, On Sun, 12 Aug 2012, Russ Allbery wrote: > I'm looking for seconds so that we can finally merge this monster. > Presented as a diff since that was the request last time, but the branch > has also been pushed to the Policy Git repository, so if you want to > review it various other ways, you ca

Bug#533287: [PATCH v2] Only the owner of a configuration file should modify it

Policy §10.7.4 explains: If it is desirable for [...] packages to share a configuration file and for all of the related packages to be able to modify that configuration file, then the following should be done: [...] ii. The owning package should also provide a program that the other pac

Bug#533287: debian-policy: please clarify 10.7.4

Le Sun, Aug 12, 2012 at 08:55:40PM -0700, Russ Allbery a écrit : > > We should be consistent about terminology. Other than that nit, seconded. Seconded as well. This bug reminds me #683495 ("#!/usr/bin/perl" MUST or SHOULD?), which is also about "must" statements encapsulated in a "should" are

Processed: user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org, limit package to debian-policy, tagging 587991 ...

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). > limit package debian-policy Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy' Limit currently set to '

Bug#648271: [debian-policy] 11.8.3 "Packages providing a terminal emulator" says xterm passes -e option straight to exec

Thomas Koch writes: > I maintain termit. My opinion is, that the policy should rather ask for > sane behaviour and the proposed change does not look sane. > Could you please also ammend this topic with a few test cases to make > testing our terminal emulators easier and to be sure that we're all

Processed: user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org, limit package to debian-policy, usertagging 676561 ...

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). > limit package debian-policy Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy' Limit currently set to '

Bug#676561: debian-policy: Please clarify important restriction on use of /run

Roger Leigh writes: > On Thu, Jun 07, 2012 at 03:38:07PM -0500, Jonathan Nieder wrote: >> Might be clearer to make it a simple, self-contained normative >> requirement --- e.g., imitating 2361862a ("New Breaks dependency >> field"): >> >>Packages must not assume the /run director

Bug#533287: debian-policy: please clarify 10.7.4

Jonathan Nieder writes: > That last "if" seems like an odd and not too useful loophole. It would > be nicer for policy to clearly state that packages *should not* modify > configuration files owned by other packages directly, whether a tool for > indirectly modifying is provided or not. If such

Bug#661816: debian-policy: Do not call update-mime directly, since it is triggered by Dpkg.

Hi, Charles Plessy wrote: > Le Thu, Mar 01, 2012 at 08:42:57AM -0600, Jonathan Nieder a écrit : >> If my package generates its mailcap file on the fly in postinst, what command >> should it run to make sure it gets used? Is >> >> dpkg-trigger --no-await --by-package= >> /usr/lib/mime/packa

Bug#661816: debian-policy: Do not call update-mime directly, since it is triggered by Dpkg.

Le Thu, Mar 01, 2012 at 08:42:57AM -0600, Jonathan Nieder a écrit : > > If my package generates its mailcap file on the fly in postinst, what command > should it run to make sure it gets used? Is > > dpkg-trigger --no-await --by-package= > /usr/lib/mime/packages > > guaranteed to continu

Bug#533287: debian-policy: please clarify 10.7.4

Hi, In 2009, Colin Watson wrote: > /etc/kernel-img.conf is a weird case. To start with, it's initially > created by the installer (base-installer) and the update-grub line is > added by another part of the installer (grub-installer). Obviously the > installer can't own a configuration file perman

Bug#571776: document symbols

Russ Allbery wrote: > Let's go with 1:1.2.3.3.dfsg in the example to show the common case > instead of the unusual case. I've applied this: Thanks. Looks good. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-policy-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@list

Bug#571776: document symbols

Jonathan Nieder writes: > Hoorah! :) I don't see any problems in the normative content, so I'd > second this if I could. Cosmetic nits (patch below): Thanks, applied. >> + In our example, if the last change to the zlib1g >> + package that could change behavior for a client o

Bug#571776: document symbols

Russ Allbery wrote: > Okay, once more for the win. Hoorah! :) I don't see any problems in the normative content, so I'd second this if I could. Cosmetic nits (patch below): [...] > +++ b/policy.sgml [...] > @@ -5633,17 +5634,29 @@ Built-Using: grub2 (= 1.99-9), loadlin (= 1.6e-1) [...] >

Bug#374029: Build-Depends{,-Indep} as defined is not useful and not followed

On Sun, Aug 12, 2012 at 01:19:53PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > Hello folks, > > The following patch implements the decision of the Debian Technical > Committee in #629385 to make build-arch and build-indep mandatory. Please > review. Note that I'm not looking for conventional seconds since the

Bug#571776: document symbols

Russ Allbery writes: > commit 97cb027db4afab774ea4f4ff9e7bef7a6dcbbda0 > Author: Russ Allbery > Date: Sun Aug 12 14:14:23 2012 -0700 > Further wording changes on top of Jonathan Neider's work I fixed the spelling of your name in Git before I pushed. Sorry about that. -- Russ Allbery (

Bug#571776: document symbols

Jonathan Nieder writes: > Jonathan Nieder wrote: >> I'll reply with an interdiff relative to the last version of the >> patch. > Here it is. And here is the interdiff between your patch and what I currently have, to make it easier for you and anyone who was familiar with your version of the pat

Bug#571776: document symbols

Jonathan Nieder writes: > Russ Allbery wrote: >> I'm therefore including here the complete SGML source of that section >> not in diff format, followed by the diff of everything *outside* of >> that section. I think this will be easier to review. > Thanks! I would have preferred a diff since it

Bug#374029: Build-Depends{,-Indep} as defined is not useful and not followed

* Russ Allbery , 2012-08-12, 13:19: --- a/policy.sgml +++ b/policy.sgml @@ -1987,52 +1987,34 @@ zope. - build-arch (optional), -build-indep (optional) + build-arch (required), +build-indep (required)

Bug#374029: Build-Depends{,-Indep} as defined is not useful and not followed

Russ Allbery wrote: > The following patch implements the decision of the Debian Technical > Committee in #629385 to make build-arch and build-indep mandatory. Please > review. Looks good to me. Thanks, Jonathan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-policy-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject

Bug#374029: Build-Depends{,-Indep} as defined is not useful and not followed

Hello folks, The following patch implements the decision of the Debian Technical Committee in #629385 to make build-arch and build-indep mandatory. Please review. Note that I'm not looking for conventional seconds since the Technical Committee has already made a judgement; rather, I'm looking fo

Bug#299007: Group staff in /usr/local: Moving forward

Hi Santiago, I'm really sorry about the delay in responding to this. I'm going to copy Joey on this message, since I suspect nearly all of the effective work in the archive can be done by dh_usrlocal. Joey, for background, this is about finally implementing the tech-ctte decision that we should

Processed: user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org, limit package to debian-policy, usertagging 670429 ...

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). > limit package debian-policy Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy' Limit currently set to '

Bug#670429: debian-policy: section tasks is missing

Charles Plessy writes: > Le Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 09:57:42PM -0700, Russ Allbery a écrit : >> Jonathan Nieder writes: >>> It's a small thing, but this makes the commas italic, which looks >>> especially strange in the text rendering. Do we care that the section >>> names are italic? My preferen

Processed: user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org, limit package to debian-policy, usertagging 654958 ...

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). > limit package debian-policy Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy' Limit currently set to '

Bug#654958: debian-policy: Document VCS fields.

Jonathan Nieder writes: > Thanks again for your help. I've applied all suggested changes. > Interdiff and updated patch attached. Thanks, this has been applied for the next release. -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to d

Processed: user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org, limit package to debian-policy, usertagging 641153 ...

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). > limit package debian-policy Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy' Limit currently set to '

Bug#641153: document Built-Using field for binary packages

Charles Plessy writes: > Le Sun, Jul 08, 2012 at 09:01:47PM -0500, Jonathan Nieder a écrit : >> Here's the same patch with the above fixes applied. Sensible? > Thanks for the corrections. > The patch is seconded by me, Russ and Ansgar, and is ready to be applied. Applied for the next release.

Processed: user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org, limit package to debian-policy ..., usertagging 683570 ...

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). > limit package debian-policy Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy' Limit currently set to '

Processed: retitle 652011 to consider dropping the separation between /bin and /usr/bin, and /lib and /usr/lib ...

Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > retitle 652011 consider dropping the separation between /bin and /usr/bin, > and /lib and /usr/lib Bug #652011 [debian-policy] general: Repeated pattern of FHS violation: Dependencies of /sbin and /bin, belong in /lib Changed Bug title to 'consi

Processed (with 3 errors): user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org, limit package to debian-policy ..., usertagging 652011 ...

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). > limit package debian-policy Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy' Limit currently set to '