On Thu, Jul 26, 2001 at 01:06:26PM +0200, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> Previously Enrique Zanardi wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 11, 2001 at 03:40:29AM +0200, Andreas Bombe wrote:
> > > Policy wants shared libraries to be in packages of names like libfoo6
> > > for a libfoo.
sion and
> + libraryname-soversion-dev
> + instead.
>
Seconded. It's a "may" and not a "must", gives more meaningful
package names, and documents current practice.
--
Enrique Zanardi [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, Apr 12, 1999 at 01:03:51PM -0400, Scott K. Ellis wrote:
> On Mon, 12 Apr 1999, Enrique Zanardi wrote:
>
> > /dev/fd0 /floppy auto defaults,user,noauto 0 0
> > /dev/cdrom/cdromiso9660 defaults,ro,user,noauto 0 0
>
> The defaults directi
used it) and could
> help the user adding it so he does not have to know this (I also filed a bug
> against boot-floppies)
Agh, another wishlist bug to close (as I added those entries last
weekend). :-)
--
Enrique Zanardi[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, Apr 12, 1999 at 04:54:03PM +0200, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> Previously Enrique Zanardi wrote:
> > I've done that for potato boot-floppies.
>
> May I ask how? I usually have these entries:
>
> /floppy /dev/floppyvfat user,noauto,noexec 0 0
> /cd
good idea?
>
> I'd say no, and recommend going the other way -- putting /cdrom and
> /floppy in the default fstab. :-)
I've done that for potato boot-floppies.
--
Enrique Zanardi[EMAIL PROTECTED]
think this contradiction
> > should be solved by changing the packaging manual, please reassign this
> > bug to the packaging-manual package (which is maintained by the
> > debian-policy mailing list), I will not object to you making this
> > reassign, but I think it should be you the one to do it.
--
Enrique Zanardi[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, Dec 17, 1998 at 10:01:54AM +, Oliver Elphick wrote:
> Enrique Zanardi wrote:
> >> Nope, the dreaded `exactly one maintainer' clause in 2.3.2 is still
> >> very much in place as of the latest policy.
> >
> >You're right. We should
On Tue, Dec 15, 1998 at 08:29:18PM +, James Troup wrote:
> Enrique Zanardi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > AFAIK, ther's nothing in the policy against maintainer groups.
>
> Nope, the dreaded `exactly one maintainer' clause in 2.3.2 is still
> very
ps. Last time
that issue was discussed, there were a few people that said maintainer
groups may lead to diluted responsibility, and someone (can't remember
who) suggested every team should have a coordinator. For example,
the boot-floppies maintainer field is: "Enrique Zanardi "
instead of "boot-floppies team ".
--
Enrique Zanardi[EMAIL PROTECTED]
tion". The script may be
shipped in an essential package, and may read a config file to decide
what to do (newbie = stop, press , veteran = wait til dpkg finish
and display, veteran-with-mail = mail message to root).
--
Enrique Zanardi [EMAIL PROTECTED]
lan to include apt in the base disks, if nobody objects. IMHO, with a
few improvements (nfs and cdrom support, to name my favourites) apt will
render the other dselect methods obsolete.
--
Enrique Zanardi[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, Sep 15, 1998 at 03:11:28PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Hi,
> >>"Enrique" == Enrique Zanardi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Enrique> For the V.I.-info (not vitally important for the package to
> Enrique> work),
>
> If it is
rk right after installation.
For the V.I.-info (not vitally important for the package to work), it may
be mailed to the root account or copied to root's home directory, or ...,
and a message added to dpkg "Read your mail ..." or "Read the file
/root/README-foo for important installation information".
(It may make sense to add a flag for attended/unattended installations).
--
Enrique Zanardi [EMAIL PROTECTED]
you approve af people punctuating Joyce's books?
I remember seeing a few 'annotated "Ulisses"' books last time I went to
the English Literature section of the university library. I guess that's
common practice.
But again, I think we should be focusing in technical documents.
--
Enrique Zanardi[EMAIL PROTECTED]
is it? Some tasks will have to be done by-hand, as currently (installing
new packages, or any package that goes to frozen or stable), but a lot of
bugs filed against ftp.debian.org would be closed faster if we could
automatically remove packages or move them from one section to another.
--
E
I'd propose that other
> `multi-maintainer' packages use the same format for the Maintainer field
> (e.g., dpkg and boot-floppies).
For boot-floppies it is:
Maintainer: Enrique Zanardi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Many people work in the code and I usually do the uploads, al
boot-floppies on his spare time, and, at least for boot-floppies, the
multi-maintainer approach has proven to be of great help (if you are
concerned about the number of open bug reports, you should see the number
of recently closed ones... and the complexity of the remaining ones).
As Manoj cla
On Fri, Mar 06, 1998 at 05:11:08PM +0100, Santiago Vila wrote:
> On Fri, 6 Mar 1998, Enrique Zanardi wrote:
>
> > If an Essential package depends on other packages, shouldn't those other
> > packages be tagged Essential as well?
> >
> > Currently, gzip (Ess
On Fri, Mar 06, 1998 at 02:27:10PM +, James Troup wrote:
> Enrique Zanardi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > If an Essential package depends on other packages, shouldn't those
> > other packages be tagged Essential as well?
>
> Certainly *not*, when the oth
If an Essential package depends on other packages, shouldn't those other
packages be tagged Essential as well?
Currently, gzip (Essential) depends on debianutils (non-Essential).
--
Enrique Zanardi[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dpto. Fisica Fundamen
ersion 2.0.7 as libc6_2.0.7-1.deb
than as libc6_2.0.7rel-1.deb. Isn't the "rel" stuff an unnecessary
modification of the upstream version number?
--
Enrique Zanardi[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dpto. Fisica Fundamental y Experimental Univ. de La Laguna
gt; (Would this make patching unnecessary?)
Because the goal is to have _both_ a system-wide inputrc _and_ a
user-specific one.
--
Enrique Zanardi[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dpto. Fisica Fundamental y Experimental Univ. de La Laguna
pkg must handle that! ...]
and make foo_-.deb Suggests: foo-translated-docs (= -)
Package management frontends should be extended to hide
foo-_-.deb from the packages list [... as was suggested for
libraries in Deity ...]
--
Enrique Zanardi[EMAIL PROTECT
there should be
> a way to override these warnings (just when someone tries to override some
> dependencies).
That looks like a good proposal. We could define that a foo_A.deb from SPI
will always conflict with a foo_B.deb from other parties, no matter the
values for A and B.
--
Enr
we?) there will be more upstream authors that package their
programs as "deb" but don't follow our policies (non-FSSTND-compliant
packages, for example).
What are we going to do to avoid conflicts between their versions and our
own packaged ones? I guess virtual-packages is not the o
x27;s useful...)
IIRC, Klee said he was working in a new source format for dpkg, that
will accept multiple patches and/or tar files to build the Debianized
sources. I guess he can tell us more if he can find a little time.
--
Enrique Zanardi[EMAIL P
27 matches
Mail list logo
