On 03.09.2010 01:46, Russ Allbery wrote:
Samuel Thibault writes:
Well, it's mostly
- some people saying "it's useless",
- while other people saying "I need it",
and also
- "en_US.UTF-8 is just fine" vs.
- "en_US.UTF-8 sucks, we really need C.UTF-8 instead"
without any convergence.
On 21.08.2010 08:36, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
On Fri, 20 Aug 2010, Russ Allbery wrote:
diff --git a/virtual-package-names-list.txt b/virtual-package-names-list.txt
index 9ba66e5..2308d39 100644
--- a/virtual-package-names-list.txt
+++ b/virtual-package-names-list.txt
@@ -123,6 +123,8 @@ News and M
On 19.08.2010 09:45, Russ Allbery wrote:
"Giacomo A. Catenazzi" writes:
On 18.08.2010 23:38, Russ Allbery wrote:
Julien Cristau writes:
Is there a spec somewhere about the command line arguments for mailx?
I know that bsd-mailx and heirloom-mailx do completely different
thi
On 19.08.2010 09:37, Russ Allbery wrote:
"Giacomo A. Catenazzi" writes:
No, I think it is wrong!
The debian/copyright also include packaging copyright. I think the part
involved in this proposal is for such reasons. So IMHO we must still
require the names of packagers (and th
On 18.08.2010 23:38, Russ Allbery wrote:
Julien Cristau writes:
On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 12:31:59 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
I propose the following addition. Seconds or objections? (As
mentioned elsewhere in the file, the * indicates that the providing
packages are using alternatives, whic
On 19.08.2010 04:10, Russ Allbery wrote:
Charles Plessy writes:
Information about the initial Debian maintainers partially overlaps the
information in debian/changelog, and the copyright statements for the
packaging work.
Under normal circumstances, it always duplicates information in
debian
On 07/15/2010 06:53 PM, Russ Allbery wrote:
"Giacomo A. Catenazzi" writes:
As we have in "test" item, I think we should add ",if implemented as a
shell built-in," also for the kill command.
Good point. Here's a new patch. (This doesn't apply to
On 05.07.2010 01:02, Raphael Geissert wrote:
On Sunday 04 July 2010 00:04:20 Russ Allbery wrote:
Yeah, I was trying too hard to avoid a problem which doesn't really
exist. Here's an updated patch.
diff --git a/policy.sgml b/policy.sgml
index bad28af..8b715d0 100644
--- a/policy.sgml
+++ b/poli
On 04.07.2010 10:42, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
On Sat, Jul 03, 2010 at 12:26:40PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
--- a/policy.sgml
+++ b/policy.sgml
@@ -7225,10 +7225,10 @@ INSTALL = install -s # (or use strip on the files in
debian/tmp)
for C files) will need to be compiled twice, for the nor
On 11.06.2010 14:25, Andrew McMillan wrote:
If the code is v1-or-later then a trivial fork (by the original
developer) is able to relicense it as v2-or-later or v3-or-later. If
the original developer is unhappy with doing that, then they do have
uncommon licensing desires.
It would be illegal
On 11.06.2010 13:16, Andrew McMillan wrote:
On Fri, 2010-06-11 at 11:35 +0200, Santiago Vila wrote:
Ok, I agree that it would a good idea to include GPL-1 in common-licenses
because of the high number of packages still using it.
I'm sorry, but I disagree, for the time being. I do not believe
On 10.06.2010 21:45, Russ Allbery wrote:
I recently did a survey of both licenses already listed in common-licenses
and ones proposed for common-licenses using a Perl script that's now in
the debian-policy Git repository. The result was that the MPL version 1.1
was used by 654 binary packages in
On 04.06.2010 04:40, Andrew McMillan wrote:
On Thu, 2010-06-03 at 18:31 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
Charles Plessy writes:
I also like the idea, so I prepared a patch (attached)
Thank you!
RFC 822 dates use only two digits for the years, but Debian changelogs
described by this paragraph (§
On 02.06.2010 14:59, Bill Allombert wrote:
What is the diffrence between RFC5322 and RFC2822 time format ?
RFC 5322 was only released in 2008, so the standard that packages
actually follow is clearly RFC2822.
I would prefer if we keep a reference to RFC2822 because is is
more well known than RF
Thorsten Glaser wrote:
Albert Cahalan dixit:
Unless plain "C" goes UTF-8
Not going to happen, it’s not binary-safe. (I fought that in
MirBSD with the OPTU-8/16 encoding scheme.)
Why not? Note that usual functions work on bytes, not on characters, and
on POSIX utilities the old/classical op
Jakub Wilk wrote:
* Giacomo A. Catenazzi , 2009-10-29, 10:16:
"must" is a quite common word in the Debian Policy:
For consistency, I'd do s/MUST/must/.
But not automatically. On RFC usage "must" is different from "MUST",
so you SHOULD distinguish th
Jakub Wilk wrote:
"must" is a quite common word in the Debian Policy:
For consistency, I'd do s/MUST/must/.
But not automatically. On RFC usage "must" is different from "MUST", so
you SHOULD distinguish the normative "MUST" and with the non normative "must".
And BTW if we do such change, w
Raphael Hertzog wrote:
On Wed, 14 Oct 2009, Russ Allbery wrote:
Do both of our proposed cron daemons support that same syntax? (Does
anyone here use bcron to comment on that?)
bcron supports the */n syntax, but not @reboot and the other @*. See
http://manpages.debian.net/cgi-bin/man.cgi?query
Manoj Srivastava wrote:
http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/utilities/crontab.html
BTW you point to the old version (2004).
The 2008 version is in:
http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/utilities/crontab.html
BTW I see only few minor formal changes of your quoted text
c
Manoj Srivastava wrote:
On Wed, Oct 07 2009, Giacomo A. Catenazzi wrote:
BTW I find no reference in policy about the NEWS.Debian file. It would
nice to require to document (at last for one stable release) all (also
user visibe API/ABI) incompatibilities in such files.
It is a goos
Raphaël Hertzog wrote:
Package: debian-policy
Version: 3.8.3.0
Severity: wishlist
We have some unwritten packaging rules and it would be good to write them
down even if some of them appear to be obvious to most of us. I think in
particular to stuff like:
- a package must at least be upgradable
Manoj Srivastava wrote:
Hi,
The most recent version of this proposal was:
--8<---cut here---start->8---
--- virtual-package-names-list.txt~ 2009-03-15 18:19:17.0 +
+++ virtual-package-names-list.txt 2009-03-15 18:20:00.0 +
Russ Allbery wrote:
"Giacomo A. Catenazzi" writes:
Do we really need to use the triplets? Do you see some possible cases
where we must really specify the first part?
Isn't someone working on a klibc port? That would require using the
triplet.
Does the new dpkg support al
Manoj Srivastava wrote:
+
+
+ A package may specify an architecture wildcard. Architecture
+ wildcards are in the format os-any and
+ any-cpu. Internally, the package
+ system normalizes the GNU triplets and the Debian
+ arches into Debian arch
Package: debian-policy
Version: 3.8.3.0
In policy 5.6.16, about Format field I read:
: This field specifies a format revision for the file. The most current format
: described in the Policy Manual is version 1.5. The syntax of the format
: value is the same as that of a package version number e
Guillem Jover wrote:
While reading the changelog, I noticed there's been seconds by non-DDs
and then wondered if those are meant to be counted or not (my
recollection tells me no, but I was not sure).
Reading the PolicyChangesProcess [0] it's not that clear, it seems to
hint to only DDs being a
Josselin Mouette wrote:
Le mercredi 12 août 2009 à 08:16 -0500, Manoj Srivastava a écrit :
AIUI, this header is here to indicate which version of the policy the
package is supposed to conform to. This way, we have a way to enforce
which policy versions are supported, e.g. in a stable release, by
Jonathan Yu wrote:
On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 12:47 PM, Russ Allbery wrote:
Jonathan Yu writes:
Indeed, I am aware that there is no official Policy decision on
copyright formats yet. Right now we're using
http://wiki.debian.org/Proposals/CopyrightFormat?action=recall&rev=196
and waiting to see
Ben Pfaff wrote:
Russ Allbery writes:
Ben Finney writes:
If you're going that far, please perform one of the following:
s/rounded/fractions rounded up/
s/rounded/fractions rounded down/
s/rounded/fractions rounded to the nearest whole number/
to disambiguate the calculation.
D
Don Armstrong wrote:
On Wed, 17 Jun 2009, Sune Vuorela wrote:
so it seems that the "alternative" interpretation, is that "if there
is a interface, then it must be used", but all that is wrapped in a
"should", which is not as binding as a "must".
While this section of policy could probably be c
Raphael Hertzog wrote:
For the second argument:
[ using bash ]
$ type printf
printf is a shell builtin
$ dash
$ type printf
printf is a shell builtin
There's no external executable needed.
but also "echo -n" is recognized by these tools.
I've interpreted the original bug report as a way to a
Russ Allbery wrote:
"Giacomo A. Catenazzi" writes:
Manoj Srivastava wrote:
The only builds Debian supports are not just the buildd ones. As
members of the free software community, we should also cater to end
users building, tweaking, and rebuilding our software.
You
Steve Langasek wrote:
On Sun, May 10, 2009 at 11:41:30PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
The only builds Debian supports are not just the buildd ones. As
members of the free software community, we should also cater to end
users building, tweaking, and rebuilding our software.
The only
Manoj Srivastava wrote:
On Sun, May 10 2009, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Sun, May 10, 2009 at 11:37:46PM +0300, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
On Sunday 10 May 2009 13:56:04 Steve Langasek wrote:
I thought it was generally recognized that it's a Bad Idea to implement
config files using your interpreter
Thorsten Glaser wrote:
Giacomo A. Catenazzi dixit:
a real locale), but in this case I would also test some UTF-16
or Asian locale (mksh should not assume UTF-8 in these cases).
It doesn’t. This test is already run for the C locale.
Besides, there are no UTF-16 or somesuch locales on UNIX®
Thorsten Glaser wrote:
Giacomo A. Catenazzi dixit:
I think you misunderstand the mksh part of the problem.
mksh has two modi: a legacy mode, in which it does not make any
assumptions about charsets or encodings and is 8-bit clean and
mostly 8-bit transparent, safe a few mostly past bugs and
Andrew McMillan wrote:
On Wed, 2009-04-08 at 10:15 +0200, Giacomo A. Catenazzi wrote:
So I've a question: what does UTF-8 mean in this context (C.UTF-8) ?
It is not a stupid question, and the answer is not the UTF-8 algorithm
to code/decode unicode.
I'm still thinking that you are
Ok, maybe I found the problem.
Giacomo A. Catenazzi wrote:
> No ;-) Ok, it take me some modifications of your program and
looking to POSIX to discover the reason.
You forget to check error codes. In this case we have
"Invalid or incomplete multibyte or wide character" in the
non
Roger Leigh wrote:
On Tue, Apr 07, 2009 at 10:36:20AM +0200, Giacomo A. Catenazzi wrote:
>> Roger Leigh wrote:
I can't help but feel that your reply completely missed the
purpose of what I want to do, and why. I hope the following
response clears things up.
I know that I
Roger Leigh wrote:
On Tue, Apr 07, 2009 at 09:24:38PM +0200, Adeodato Simó wrote:
+ Thorsten Glaser (Tue, 07 Apr 2009 18:54:59 +):
Except the ton which sets LC_ALL=C to get sane (parsable,
dependable, historically compatible) output.
These would then unset all other LC_* and LANG and LANGU
Andrew McMillan wrote:
On Tue, 2009-04-07 at 22:32 +0200, Adeodato Simó wrote:
It is my impression that more packages than mksh could use an UTF-8
locale at build time (I’m afraid I don’t have pointers, but I’m sure
I’ve come across at least a couple).
Wouldn’t it be just better to change Debia
Roger Leigh wrote:
> I wasn't aware that this level of checking was performed, though
it does make sense. But, does it not reject non 7-bit input in the C
locale for completeness?
Should tools doing "raw" I/O not be using lower level interfaces
such as fread() and fwrite() rather than the "for
Roger Leigh wrote:
On Mon, Apr 06, 2009 at 11:09:17AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Mon, Apr 06, 2009 at 05:33:35PM +, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
If you need a specific locale (as seems from "mksh", not
sure if it is a bug in that program), you need to set it.
You can only set a locale on a
Thorsten Glaser wrote:
For the mksh regression tests, I need a UTF-8 locale working; most
systems either provide “en_US.UTF-8” or “en_US.utf8” with the former
being recommended.
Build-depending on locales-all has worked for me so far, except it
won’t do in Kubuntu where said package does not exi
Don Armstrong wrote:
Is there any reason why we can't transition official X-* headers to
real * headers as they become widely used (and when they're inshrined
in policy)?
Some transition period would be necessary, and dpkg-gencontrol could
be patched to automatically rename the X-* headers to *
Raphael Hertzog wrote:
After having accepted the patch, I wondered where it should be documented
and Nils pointed me to the policy section. So I asked him to submit a bug
here.
I fail to see any problem with telling people outside of Debian that they
can freely use "X-" fields for their private
Nils Rennebarth wrote:
Package: debian-policy
Version: 3.8.0.1
Severity: wishlist
Please add something along the following lines to the section 5.7
"User defined fields" to the debian policy manual:
Usually, unknown fields are iggnored by the debian packaging system. To
avoid conflicts of user
Don Armstrong wrote:
On Wed, 25 Mar 2009, Mike Hommey wrote:
On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 02:56:57PM -0700, Don Armstrong wrote:
I think we're getting bogged down in the debian/copyright discussion,
and I'm starting to think that some enumeration of what we need
debian/copyright for would help us fi
Ben Finney wrote:
Don Armstrong writes:
On Wed, 25 Mar 2009, Ben Finney wrote:
I think it's important for users of *all* software to have easy,
predictably-located access to the terms under which they receive
it.
What's the use case? That's what I'd like to focus on first; what
debian/copyri
Russ Allbery wrote:
Ben Finney writes:
Speaking of which, the other requirement we have is:
8) Provide information about the upstream maintainer and upstream
location of the software for non-native software, including any
necessary repackaging of upstream source for Debian's purposes.
Rene Engelhard wrote:
Giacomo A. Catenazzi wrote:
Joerg Jaspert wrote:
The real problem here is that FTP masters require the list of copyright
holders to be up-to-date each time the package goes through NEW.
Whatever justification exists for this requirement, I???m starting to find
it
Joerg Jaspert wrote:
The real problem here is that FTP masters require the list of copyright
holders to be up-to-date each time the package goes through NEW.
Whatever justification exists for this requirement, I???m starting to find
it unacceptable. If a package has to go through NEW, it takes ab
As Joerg has just said on d-d-a, some new sections have been added to
the archive. I've attached a patch for policy to bring it up-to-date.
The list become complex, considering also the priorities of sections.
Could we ask ftp-master to give us a fixed-URL to the list of sections,
the meaning a
Wouter Verhelst wrote:
On Thu, Mar 05, 2009 at 11:03:57AM +0100, Giacomo A. Catenazzi wrote:
Jon Dowland wrote:
A brief explanation as to their meaning. Doom games are
divided into engine and world-resource components. The
former is captured by 'doom-engine'.
I don't understan
Jon Dowland wrote:
A brief explanation as to their meaning. Doom games are
divided into engine and world-resource components. The
former is captured by 'doom-engine'.
I don't understand why we need a 'doom-engine' virtual package.
[i.e.: avoid circular dependencies].
IMHO, a user will select a
Julien Cristau wrote:
On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 17:14:20 +0100, Giacomo A. Catenazzi wrote:
But in this manner there is a risk of unneeded upload, in order to
increase policy version or to remove warning from lintian about old policy.
I think to much upload could confuse also the developers
Bill Allombert wrote:
On Sun, Mar 01, 2009 at 09:54:25PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
I think it's time (really, probably past time) for the 3.8.1 upload.
There's still some stuff in flight, but that's always going to be true,
and a lot of bugs are already fixed in Git.
My intention is to upload
Steve Langasek wrote:
On Sat, Feb 28, 2009 at 06:32:45PM +0100, Giacomo Catenazzi wrote:
Hmmm. I partially agree, but then we have an unnecessary exception:
such virtual packages must have only one "provider", or else there
will be problems (IIRC) on dpkg, apt or ddbuild, if such dependency
is d
Giacomo A. Catenazzi wrote:
Steve Langasek wrote:
On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 03:42:39PM +0100, Holger Levsen wrote:
But as this would hardcode exim4 as the default MTA for Debian in a
number
of packages, some better solutions have been proposed in
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2008/05
Steve Langasek wrote:
On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 03:42:39PM +0100, Holger Levsen wrote:
But as this would hardcode exim4 as the default MTA for Debian in a number
of packages, some better solutions have been proposed in
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2008/05/msg00381.html with the best
choi
Russ Allbery wrote:
Kel Modderman writes:
It is the opinion of myself and Petter Reinholdtsen, maintainers of the
sysvinit package, that the last sentence of §9.3.1 of policy is no
longer relevant and should be removed:
"""Also, if the script name ends in .sh, the script will be sourced in
ru
Russ Allbery wrote:
"Adam D. Barratt" writes:
The Policy section detailing the "Distribution" field in .changes files
specifies that the field may contain a space-separated list of
distributions. Whilst this is technically accurate, the feature has been
deprecated since the "testing" distribut
Russ Allbery wrote:
Russ Allbery writes:
I did a bit more research based on Osamu Aoki's excellent work.
Currently, these things are referred to using three different terms:
* dak calls them components.
* The current Debian Policy document calls them categories.
* The Social Contract calls th
Russ Allbery wrote:
> Alternatively, we could document the permitted character set for the name
portion of the Maintainer field and exclude commas. It's annoying to do
this since commas have been supported in the past (in Maintainer, they're
unambiguous) and have only become a problem in Upload
Russ Allbery wrote:
Package: debian-policy
Version: 3.8.0.1
Severity: minor
I read through the shared library sections of Policy a few times last night
and can't find anywhere where Policy unambiguously recommends always
including a version in SONAME for public libraries. If you don't have a
ve
Russ Allbery wrote:
Raphael Hertzog <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
On Sat, 12 Jul 2008, Raphael Geissert wrote:
As demonstrated by the following trivia[1], and also mentioned by
SUSv3, the echo built-in varies from implementation to implementation
and thus should be discouraged.
Well, you jus
Giacomo A. Catenazzi wrote:
At the end of the process, I would like to have a glossary
(maybe included into the policy)
To simplify the discussion, I created:
http://wiki.debian.org/PolicyGlossary
It contain important term and links to policy.
ciao
cate
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email
Russ Allbery wrote:
"Giacomo A. Catenazzi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
OTOH, the 'Release' file uses the dak terminology, and the name is
encoded on some tools. The most visible is apt: apt_preferences(5) for
pining use the term "Component".
Because is not
Russ Allbery wrote:
Ian Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Russ Allbery writes:
So as a purist, I would prefer `category'. `Area' works too since it
refers to an `area' in the FTP site.
I did a bit more research based on Osamu Aoki's excellent work.
Currently, these things are referred to
On the bug: #479080
Manoj Srivastava wrote:
On Thu, 05 Jun 2008 21:40:04 +0200, Giacomo Catenazzi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
I think policy should include a incomplete list of "essential"
package, because of the "side effect" (no dependencies on essential
package).
No, this decision s
Russ Allbery wrote:
This proposal asks that Policy mandate a location to which init scripts
must log verbose errors. The original proposal was made in 2002 and there
was little subsequent discussion in 2003. This Policy proposal is also
not currently widely implemented in the archive and hence
Manoj Srivastava wrote:
Hi,
On Fri, 02 May 2008 17:45:30 +0200, Carl Fürstenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
said:
Policy section 3.8, about essential packages, doesn't explain when/why
essential is neccessary, only that it should not be essential if it's
not necessary.
My understanding is th
Russ Allbery wrote:
"Giacomo A. Catenazzi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
"web browser to display an URL."
I don't like the sentence, but anyway I don't worry much,
because the program should be sensible, and open browser
only with correct protocols.
I'v
Russ Allbery wrote:
--- a/policy.sgml
+++ b/policy.sgml
@@ -8675,6 +8675,68 @@ name ["syshostname"]:
for games (X and non-X games) should be installed in
/usr/share/man/man6.
+
+
+ Web browsers
+
+
+ Some programs have the ability to launch a
Steve Langasek wrote:
On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 07:26:37AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 04:25:28PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 10:16:29AM +0100, Giacomo A. Catenazzi wrote:
Speaking as a human being, I would suggest that Debian policy should be
Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
On Mon, 2008-02-25 at 10:16 +0100, Giacomo A. Catenazzi wrote:
Think about:
apt
ntpdate
clamav-freshclam
dcc-client
icewasel
popularity-contest
and IIRC bind will check the root zone.
Except popularity contest, I'm pretty sure none of this are actually
"
Lars Wirzenius wrote:
On su, 2008-02-24 at 16:43 -0600, Raphael Geissert wrote:
* The package/software SHOULD offer a way to disable the 'phoning home' code
if it contains such kind of 'feature'.
Speaking as a human being, I would suggest that Debian policy should be
that all "phoning home" MU
Manoj Srivastava wrote:
On Tue, 18 Dec 2007 20:10:33 +, Ian Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
Manoj Srivastava writes ("[Policy-rewrite]: Determining distinct
policy rules"):
While we are all pondering the new policy draft format, the next step
to be taken are looking at current policy, an
Colin Watson wrote:
On Mon, Sep 03, 2007 at 05:38:10PM +0200, Giacomo A. Catenazzi wrote:
Colin Watson wrote:
I don't like the proposal ;-)
It is not very POSIXly and to application specific.
Of course it is application-specific; /usr/share/man is
application-specific (i.e. specific t
Colin Watson wrote:
Package: debian-policy
Severity: wishlist
(...)
--- orig/policy.sgml
+++ mod/policy.sgml
@@ -8450,6 +8450,39 @@
be present in the future.
+
+
+ Manual pages that are installed under
+ /usr/share/man/ll, where ll
+
Manoj Srivastava wrote:
Hi folks,
This proposal is based on part of a talk I gave at debconf7, and
is about reorganizing the policy document(s). The current policy
document grew organically from the dpkg documentation, and the
packaging manual, and has grown bloated, and contains mate
Russ Allbery wrote:
Here is a proposed wording patch. Unless there are any objections, I'll
commit this to my repository.
--- orig/policy.sgml
+++ mod/policy.sgml
@@ -8653,8 +8653,8 @@
Packages distributed under the UCB BSD license, the Artistic
- license, the GNU GPL, a
82 matches
Mail list logo
