Bug#72949: PROPOSED] 00/10/02 Policy aspects of the packaging manual

2000-10-02 Thread Franklin Belew
On Mon, Oct 02, 2000 at 12:06:13AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > Package: Debian-policy > Version: 3.2.1.0 > Severity: wishlist > > I propose that the following file be included in policy, and > be referenced in the Policy manual. Subsequently the packagign manual > package can be t

Re: Status of open topics -- comments?

2000-08-30 Thread Franklin Belew
On Wed, Aug 30, 2000 at 01:09:37PM +0200, Josip Rodin wrote: > On Tue, Aug 29, 2000 at 11:52:34PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > > #66023: [PROPOSAL] Treat plugins and shared libraries differently > > Status: This was never formally proposed or seconded, though there > > seems to be a

Re: Picking apart the packaging manual (long)

2000-08-29 Thread Franklin Belew
On Tue, Aug 29, 2000 at 02:57:30PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: Can we add a section on shared objects that are merely plugins or components of a larger program? For example: xmms plugins, and mozilla xpcom objects Frank aka Myth

Bug#69487: the example for using nostrip in DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS is incorrect

2000-08-23 Thread Franklin Belew
On Wed, Aug 23, 2000 at 02:59:39PM -0500, Steve Greenland wrote: > On 20-Aug-00, 15:24 (CDT), Ben Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > The nostrip check needs to be inside the debug check. Because of you are > > not compiling with debugging turned on, there's no reason to not strip the > > binar

Shared libs in non-standard locations

1999-12-14 Thread Franklin Belew
Section 4.3 of policy says nothing about the location of libraries. Section 12 of packaging manual says nothing about the location of libraries I would like to know what rules there are (if any) about shared libraries in locations not mentions in /etc/ld.so.conf or what debian considers "standard

Bug#51879: PROPOSAL: package may be maintained by a group

1999-12-07 Thread Franklin Belew
On Mon, Dec 06, 1999 at 03:21:58PM -0800, Joey Hess wrote: > Franklin Belew wrote: >> On Sat, Dec 04, 1999 at 01:31:55AM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote: >>> Hi, >>>>>"Joey" == Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >>> >>>

Bug#51879: PROPOSAL: package may be maintained by a group

1999-12-04 Thread Franklin Belew
On Sat, Dec 04, 1999 at 01:31:55AM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > Hi, > >>"Joey" == Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Urk. I find this confusing (perhaps I have far too set an idea > about what a maintainer is). > > Joey> - Every package must have exactly one maintainer at

Bug#39299: AMENDED PROPOSAL] Permit use of bz2 for source packages

1999-10-25 Thread Franklin Belew
On Mon, Oct 25, 1999 at 11:32:32PM +0200, Goswin Brederlow wrote: >Ben Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>writes: > >>On Fri, Oct 22, 1999 at 07:11:24PM +0200, Goswin Brederlow wrote: >>>Chris Lawrence <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >>> Therefore, I propose that we permit the use of bzip2 to compress >>>

Re: Packages should not Conflict on the basis of duplicate funct

1999-09-27 Thread Franklin Belew
On Mon, Sep 27, 1999 at 04:44:10PM -0400, Clint Adams wrote: > > a) I would not test a new daemon on a working machine, I would use a > > separate > > So? > > > b) if you know what you are doing, compile the packages by hand, fix their > > install scripts, and remove the conflicts. You are tryi

Re: weekly policy summary

1999-09-05 Thread Franklin Belew
On Fri, Sep 03, 1999 at 11:04:29AM -0700, Joey Hess wrote: > Here's what's been happening on debian-policy this week. > >Amendments > > Delay the /usr/doc transition till after potato (#42477) > * Stalled for 2 weeks. > * Pro