iness remaining in policy
anyway. Somebody who thinks they are worthwhile should write a new
document with them in. If nobody has presented themselves as willing
to do this (in the years since the appendices were added), surely that
is an indication that these texts are not
On Fri, Sep 02, 2005 at 11:45:47AM +0200, cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis) wrote:
> On Thursday 01 September 2005 18:26, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 01, 2005 at 02:03:27PM +0200, cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis)
> wrote:
> > > but is there really any good reason to have
nes are highly
subjective and serve only to validate redhat.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
ckages
> instantly buggy, which should be avoided if at all possible (and it most
> certainly is possible)
That rationale only works when policy is empirically correct.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew
x27;. Some
packages suck, and I object to anything that tries to give them equal
priority as less sucky packages.
> Maybe its not worth the effort to try.
I'd go with that.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `'
put on this CD?", and
when there's a choice of two, it's not unreasonable for us to just
pick one.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
t will refer to it,
Not with a little mod_rewrite. Or even a 302 redirect.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
t break anything:
>
> 1) old debian/rules, new dpkg-buildpackages:
>
> debian/rules build BUILD=build-arch
>
> since BUILD is not used in debian/rules, this is equivalent to
> debian/rules build
> which is OK.
Did you read what I wrote? Or bug #216492?
--
.''
On Mon, Oct 20, 2003 at 06:32:42PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 20, 2003 at 03:30:52PM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > > The defect is that build-indep is made as root. The advantage over
> > > Andrew solution is to not make build-arch as root.
> >
&g
On Mon, Oct 20, 2003 at 10:24:19AM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 20, 2003 at 12:15:17AM -0500, Chris Cheney wrote:
> > On Sun, Oct 19, 2003 at 08:15:43PM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > > On Sun, Oct 19, 2003 at 01:20:39PM +0100, Scott James Remnant wrote:
>
quot;; rather, you have inverted
the direction of the preposition.
The "dependencies of perl" are the contents of the Depends line in the
perl package.
The "dependencies on perl" are the packages which contain perl in
their own Depends lines.
--
.''`. **
that upgrades using such an old dpkg version are unlikely to
> +work for other reasons, even if this old argument behavior
> +is handled by your postinst script.
> +
> +
>
>
Seconded.
--
ss makework for the maintainer" the point of
lintian/linda? :P
The value is rather limited though... two cases I can think of, are
trying to build the arch-dep components (which should do nothing,
successfully) and adding an arch-dep component to the package late
s to be in Build-Depends
> for dh_clean to be guaranteed available to the clean target.
Not quite; it should be modified to explicitly exclude
debhelper. There are very few packages which are actually needed at
clean time - the warning is correct for most things.
--
.''
ption is given, the first line of
> + output should have the following format:
> +
> +Checking status of description: short-state.
> +
> + where description is the same as in the daemon
> + starting message, and short-state is one of
> + running, dead, pid file exists, dead,
> + lock file exists, stopped, and unknown,
> + corresponding to the status exit code. A more verbose status
> + report may follow if appropriate.
> +
> +
>
>
>
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
pgpAixkjIRipr.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Sun, Aug 31, 2003 at 04:59:43PM +0200, Denis Barbier wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 31, 2003 at 02:20:06PM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > On Sun, Aug 31, 2003 at 01:35:36PM +0200, Martin Godisch wrote:
> > > This proposal aims to use UTF-8 encoding not only for debian/changelog,
cript should print an error message and return a
non-zero exit status code. Packages are encouraged to select return
codes based on the following list.
[When we have most packages in compliance with this, we can upgrade it
to a "should" clause aga
y so it could be used by maintainer scripts
> on package upgrades.
You can't make it mandatory before you implement it.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
pgpF8hzm694ot.pgp
Description: PGP signature
ls. There are
a number of bugs open on dpkg itself about this, without even
considering the higher-level tools.
A proposal requiring control files to be ASCII only might be more
appropriate.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :'
require the init script _fail_ if the program is removed but not
purged, while we require it silently do nothing and return
success. This proposal would therefore introduce bugs in most existing
init scripts.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffi
On Thu, Jul 31, 2003 at 06:39:38PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 31, 2003 at 06:24:18PM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > So, let's break down what happens a bit:
> >
> > - dpkg unpacks the files, with their original permissions
> > - postinst creat
ction 10.9:
If you want files in a package to be owned by a dynamically allocated
user or group, then you should create the user or group in preinst, so
that it is present when the package is unpacked.
====
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU
dered buggy (all my C packages, most
> of whom rely on upstream Makefiles install target, and do not call
> install directly).
>
> How many packages would be affected?
Before any of that, come up with a good reason why --strip-unneeded
doesn
GR to get my packages out of
> my control.
Apparently policy is now the exclusive property of Manoj.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ | Dept. of Computing,
`. `' | Imperial College,
`-
the
> one that the user will (in most cases) want to remove the config files.
>
> But at other hand, I can read this configuration files and create a
> database, and then I can see which packages were purged... what do you
> think?
That's the right general idea, yes.
--
t use icewm anymore, please remove
> its configuration files from my home dir".
This doesn't need to be a control file, and doesn't need to be covered
by policy. Go write the program and then ask people to install the
necessary data files for it. It should be fairly simple.
--
t; and just stuff everything into Build-Depends.
When I do it, I ignore what policy says and do what works. That means
the build target is a no-op (or possibly an alias for build-arch), and
everything else behaves as expected.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :'
27; target is
>invoked.
This is probably better, since it doesn't change anything that
currently works... but do we really want to do that?
Note, both of these will require changing dpkg-dev, and may cause
difficulties building new source packages on older releases.
--
.
7;s pretty clear that it's not all *that*
important.
However, regardless of what policy says, those packages are broken
anyway. If you don't have debhelper installed, and you run
"dpkg-buildpackage -rfakeroot -us -uc -b", it'll fail. This bug is not
important because there's no real reason to run that command on an
arch-indep package.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ | Dept. of Computing,
`. `' | Imperial College,
`- -><- | London, UK
pgpUZF4VJW06T.pgp
Description: PGP signature
27; and `Build-Conflicts-Indep' fields must
>be satisfied when any of the following targets is invoked:
> + `build', `build-indep', `binary' and `binary-indep'.
> - `build', `build-indep', `clean', `binary' and `binary-
-arch,
since that's what actually makes things work on the buildds.
Why do we still have a 'build' target in policy anyway? Isn't it about
time we ditched it, or at least made it optional (yes, buildds, they
don't really need to run it afaict)?
--
.''`. ** Debian G
d out as well.
Yes, same problem.
I'm fairly convinced that this can't be solved unless upstream
developers get a clue. Furthermore, I suspect that the problems lie
only with a small number of libraries. It might be interesting if
somebody were to investigate in detail which ones are re
cient medium
> > > for archiving and stuff.
> >
> > I'm not convinced. Everything you say can be done perfectly well thru
> > mailing
> > lists.
>
> Adam, please, let the translators work. Stop giving useless advices on
> something you don'
ed note, since control.tar.gz
is packed into the ar archive before data.tar.gz, a sufficiently
intelligent http client can acquire just that portion of the package
on demand.
[Note, I'm not convinced that this is a useful thing to do, just
wondering whether it is possible]
--
.'&#x
ed to policy (by way of a wishlist
bug filed against debian-policy) for inclusion in the list of virtual
packages.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ | Dept. of Computing,
`. `' | Imperial College,
`-
which
finds the current list.
Option #4:
Define what is meant by "privately amoung packages" more accurately,
and rewrite the paragraph in terms of that.
Other ideas? I'm hovering between #1 and #4.
[Default option: bicker about it and get nothing useful done]
--
.''
If your package creates or uses configuration files
outside of /etc, and it is not feasible to modify
the package to use the /etc, you must still put
the files in /etc. You may need to create symbolic links to
those files from the location that the package
requires.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ | Dept. of Computing,
`. `' | Imperial College,
`- -><- | London, UK
pgporbL9WqFuY.pgp
Description: PGP signature
7.html
Hmm, wretched limited debbugs semantics. How about ranges?
{RC, (serious/important/normal/minor), wishlist} or similar. That still
covers all the cases, I think.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ | Dept. of Computing,
`. `&
27;'`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ | Dept. of Computing,
`. `' | Imperial College,
`- -><- | London, UK
pgpyibTAg7L18.pgp
Description: PGP signature
rt-dynamic -o $@ $< -L. -Wl,-Bstatic -lfoo -ldl -Wl,-Bdynamic
clean:
rm -f libfoo.so libfoo.a *.o t-shared t-static module.so
-export-dynamic does no good if you linked a static object; you want a
dynamic object with libfoo linked statically.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ | Dept. of Computing,
`. `' | Imperial College,
`- -><- | London, UK
pgpbtkoXXKcIO.pgp
Description: PGP signature
not setup to grok SGML and how to break lines correctly. Can
we make a recommendation somewhere visible that people modify and diff
against policy.txt.gz instead?
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ | Dept. of Computing,
`. `' | Imperial College,
`- -><- | London, UK
s [fileutils] 4.5.1-2The GNU core utilities
ii fileutils 4.5.1-2GNU file management utilities
-- no debconf information
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ | Dept. of Computing,
`. `' | Imperial College,
`- -><- | London, UK
pgppxwzaQzreJ.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Tue, Sep 10, 2002 at 01:10:18PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 09, 2002 at 07:20:14PM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > + The system administrator should be able to delete files in
> > + `/usr/share/doc' without causing any programs to break. A package
ld be installed under
`/usr/share//' with symbolic links from
`/usr/share/doc//'.
(For those of you playing along at home, think about what happens when
the package is a documentation browser).
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : htt
a symlink /usr/doc/package
+ that pointed to the new location of its documentation in
+ /usr/share/doc/package. This is no
+ longer necessary, and packages may now remove the symlinks.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :
ts?
Seems at least as valuable as the "get-orig-source" optional target,
probably more so.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ | Dept. of Computing,
`. `' | Imperial College,
`- -><- | London, UK
pgpQxsn356KoJ.pgp
Description: PGP signature
shouldn't be amending the FHS, anyway.
Amending the FHS is fine, you just shouldn't be doing it on
debian-policy. I suggest you take it to the non-debian FHS list (URL,
anybody?).
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ | Dept. of Computing,
`. `' | Imperial College,
`- -><- | London, UK
t; Other packages may insert itself in the gnome and KDE menu and use a
> removeonwm="kde:gnome".
>
> Comments?
Neither KDE nor Gnome are WMs.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : | Dept. of Computing,
`.
Non-conformance with guidelines denoted by should
(or recommended) will generally be considered a bug, but will not
necessarily render a package unsuitable for distribution. Guidelines
denoted by may (or optional) are truly optional and adherence is left
to the main
On Tue, Oct 09, 2001 at 10:37:25AM -0500, Colin Watson wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 09, 2001 at 11:11:44AM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 09, 2001 at 01:05:09AM -0700, ivan wrote:
> > > Current perl policy provides an unambiguous mapping from CPAN distribution
> >
use it as its real name.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : | Dept. of Computing,
`. `' | Imperial College,
`-http://www.debian.org/ | London, UK
either, nor do they need to be, and it doesn't apply to the majority
of packages.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : | Dept. of Computing,
`. `' | Imperial College,
`-http://www.debian.org/ | London, UK
pgpYUg6YZWVyA.pgp
Description: PGP signature
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : | Dept. of Computing,
`. `' | Imperial College,
`-http://www.debian.org/ | London, UK
pgpdNZB7cirGy.pgp
Description: PGP signature
53 matches
Mail list logo
