On 12/08/02 18:08, Adam DiCarlo wrote:
Ideally debian/control's known fields would be extended, e.g.,
Upstream-Maintainer: John Doe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Upstream-Homepage: http://whatever.sourceforge.net/
Is this worthy of filing as a wishlist on dpkg?
Personally, there have been many t
"Christopher W. Curtis" wrote:
> A (I hope) pertinent example: I don't like portmap in the required
> package netbase. I don't like the existing "solution" for diasbling
> it. Why? This is me. Who cares, I'm providing an alternative. Look
> at
Joey Hess wrote:
>
> Ethan Benson wrote:
> > because not all daemons are alike, each has thier own subtle needs,
> > trying to make a one-size-fits-all shell script `library' will only
> > cause bugs, and make the script less clear and harder to modify.
>
> I have to agree. If you read say, 50 in
Ethan Benson wrote:
>
> On Sat, Jul 08, 2000 at 01:16:42AM -0400, Christopher W. Curtis wrote:
> >
> > Why do you feel this way? A lot of the debain scripts contain stuff
> > which seems non-obvious to me, and they (pretty much) all do the same
>
> the majority of
[mass cc cleaning; does this belong in -policy?]
Ethan Benson wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jul 07, 2000 at 10:44:15PM -0400, Christopher W. Curtis wrote:
> >
> > My idea is to have a script, '/etc/init.d/defaults', which every init
> > script sources. 'defaults
"Christopher W. Curtis" wrote:
> I've taken an interest in this as well. I rough-drafted a system last
> night that is probably different from the tradional debian way, but as I
> find 'the debain way' often confusing, I'll just proceed.
Sorry for being
Joey Hess wrote:
>
> tony mancill wrote:
> > While we're discussing this, I'd like to hear comments on the idea of
> > using an /etc/rc.config.d/$package scheme, like that in HP-UX. This file
[...]
>
> I'll try to summarize the rest of the thread:
>
> 1. The files should include nothing but simp
7 matches
Mail list logo
