Josh Triplett writes:
> Which effectively means the admin should never delete any existing entry
> in the file, only add their own.
It's a configuration file that is not supposed to ever be changed. If
there are local changes, an admin will likely not include updates
provided by newer packages.
Ansgar Burchardt writes:
> a. tor@.service has no init script with the same name. This should be
>fine. (Note: there is also both a "tor.service" and "tor" init
>script.)
Presumably this is fine for the same reason as b.
> b. ssh.socket for systemd has no equivalent in sysvinit at all.
Ansgar Burchardt writes:
> c. It is better to ship integration with some init systems than
>no integration at all. (Including sysvinit scripts at all is not
>required, only when any other integrations are provided.)
As a special example:
DBus can start services on-demand. On systems usin
Andreas Henriksson wrote:
> It seems obvious to me that the above policy snippet was written in a
> time when the universe revolved around sysvinit. In current day and age
> sysvinit itself would be an "Alternate init system". We could update the
> snippet to say that any package providing support
Hi,
On Tue, Oct 16, 2018 at 06:49:56PM +0200, Ansgar Burchardt wrote:
[...]
> +---
> | However, any package integrating with other init systems must also
> | be backwards-compatible with sysvinit by providing a SysV-style init
> | script with the same name as and equivalent functionality to any
>
Package: debian-policy
Version: 4.2.1.2
Severity: normal
This requirement is currently included in Debian Policy:
+---
| However, any package integrating with other init systems must also
| be backwards-compatible with sysvinit by providing a SysV-style init
| script with the same name as and equ
What I don't understand is: why are we even having this conversation ?
What good reason can possibly have motivated #416585 ? Certainly not
the tiny use of disk space in small installs. The only motivation I
can guess at is a desire to be tidy and delete "obsolete" things.
That would be a very v
Hi
On Tue, Oct 16, 2018 at 11:49:58AM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> This makes it sound theoretical, or a question of breaking people's
> `finger macros'. That is indeed annoying. But there is a much more
> serious practical point, which Paul Hardy touches on.
How many people are using "ed" and n
Ian Jackson writes ("Bug#776413: The priority of the ed package"):
> Bastian Blank writes ("Re: Bug#776413: The priority of the ed package"):
> > Serial lines have absolutely no problem with vim or similar stuff. ANSI
> > command sequences work on all of them. You may need to restrict
> > yoursel
Ian Jackson writes ("Re: Bug#776413: The priority of the ed package"):
> I don't think ex is in the base system. Are you suggesting that an
> implementation of it should be added ? On my system here it seems to
> be provided by vim.tiny and /usr/bin/ex is 20x the size of /bin/ed.
Another reason
Bastian Blank writes ("Re: Bug#776413: The priority of the ed package"):
> On Tue, Oct 16, 2018 at 11:49:58AM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > This makes it sound theoretical, or a question of breaking people's
> > `finger macros'. That is indeed annoying. But there is a much more
> > serious practi
Lev Lamberov writes ("Bug#776413: The priority of the ed package"):
> Some time ago (see, #416585) the priority of the ed package has been
> changed to "optional", but ed is still a part of POSIX standard. For me
> personally the main issue here is the interpretation of "Unix-like" in
> the Debian
Hi,
I spoke with Sean during DebConf18 about #776557 and he promised me to give me
an answer on that. None received so far, though. I guess there are more urgent
policy issues around there...
Best regards,
Martin
PS: sorry for TOFU when sending mails from my cell phone during vacation.
> Am 1
Dear Policy team,
as suggested by Chris Lamb [suggestion], I'd like to request your input
on #776413. It is concerned with the priority of the ed package. There
are two conflicting requests. Some users request ed to have priority
"optional", other users request it to be "important". Please, take a
14 matches
Mail list logo
