Re: missing FHS archives

se that /usr/libexec does. Individual binaries are allowed in /usr/lib (e.g. libc6: /usr/lib/pt_chown) and a collection of related binaries can be put in a subdir of /usr/lib. -- Joel Klecker (aka Espy)Debian GNU/Linux Developer mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://web.espy.org/> http://www.debian.org/>

Re: Shared libs in non-standard locations

h value that causes ld.so to add the directory containing the program defining $ORIGIN to the search path). -- Joel Klecker (aka Espy)Debian GNU/Linux Developer mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://web.espy.org/> http://www.debian.org/>

Re: The end of GIF format [was : Dangerous precedent being set - possible serious violation of the GPL ]

ee is due to the definition of non-free in policy. -- Joel Klecker (aka Espy)Debian GNU/Linux Developer mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://web.espy.org/> http://www.debian.org/>

Re: [PROPOSED] Change package relations policy to remove references to non-free from main

non-fee bits which can create gifs. ZIf > it can create a gif, it can't be free. And a gif creator does not > exist to ``enhance'' the multitudes of packages that can use it; > those packages should reasonably suggest a package that provides > added functionality. Do

Bug#50832: PROPOSED] Clarify meaning of Essential: yes

ssion, so procmail ate it for having a duplicate msgid ] Seconded. -- Joel Klecker (aka Espy)Debian GNU/Linux Developer mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://web.espy.org/> http://www.debian.org/>

Bug#48045: debian-policy: non-US is a misnomer

y be kept outside the USA. You're implying of course that only the US has software patents, which is false. mp3 encoding is covered by both US and German patents and IDEA is claimed to be patented in Europe as well as the US (I think ascom is deliberately misleading as to where it is actuall

Re: Source dependencies: are we ready?

At 11:42 +0200 1999-10-28, Santiago Vila wrote: On Wed, 27 Oct 1999, Joel Klecker wrote: At 14:42 +0200 1999-10-27, Santiago Vila wrote: > I doubt gcc works without ldso ;-) Sure it does, it's not a libc5 executable. Ooops! I forgot that libc6 uses its own dynamic linker. Why is ld

Re: Source dependencies: are we ready?

a libc5 executable. -- Joel Klecker (aka Espy)Debian GNU/Linux Developer mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://web.espy.org/> http://www.debian.org/>

Re: Source dependencies: are we ready?

t and time. gettext is pretty ok, time is a bit unusual but no problem. I eliminated time a while back. -- Joel Klecker (aka Espy)Debian GNU/Linux Developer mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://web.espy.org/> http://www.debian.org/>

Re: Source dependencies: are we ready?

eliminated the tetex-bin dependency, BTW. bzip2 hadn't occurred to me as a dependency, but I guess it is. What else? patch? We need to discuss what's build-essential anyway. Here's a start: libc-dev gcc g++ libstdc++-dev patch make dpkg-dev binutils bison -- Joel Klecker (aka

Bug#43928: libc and kernel source policy

besides not to put non-headers there by reference of the FHS). -- Joel Klecker (aka Espy)Debian GNU/Linux Developer mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://web.espy.org/> http://www.debian.org/>

Bug#46522: [PROPOSAL] Amend non-free definition (was: Re: Bug#46522: [knghtbrd@debian.org: Re: SSH never free])

t 1999 13:12:57 -0700 From: Joseph Carter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Raul Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: Herbert Xu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Joel Klecker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, debian-policy@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: SSH never free User-Agent: Mutt/1.0pre2i In-Reply-To: &l

Bug#42052: var/spool/mail and /var/mail

macro to find where the mail spool is. -- Joel Klecker (aka Espy)Debian GNU/Linux Developer mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://web.espy.org/> http://www.debian.org/>

Bug#29522: marked as done ([PROPOSED]: clarification needed about diversions)

dpkg-divert --package smailwrapper --add --rename \ --divert /usr/sbin/smail.real /usr/sbin/smail fi It's also been suggested that --rename is potentially harmful. -- Joel Klecker (aka Espy)Debian GNU/Linux Developer mailto:[EMAIL

Re: Source dependencies: are we ready?

[hurd-i386] It'd be cool to have dpkg proper support this syntax too. -- Joel Klecker (aka Espy)Debian GNU/Linux Developer mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://web.espy.org/> http://www.debian.org/>

Re: Source dependencies: are we ready?

he discussion of the proposal. Someone who simply reads the new policy will have no clue (besides perhaps guessing that the -Indep form has some relation to binary-indep) what exactly the difference is and in what situations each is used. -- Joel Klecker (aka Espy)Debian GNU/Li

Re: Source dependencies: are we ready?

ge using a Source-Depends: field, or will they die? If the latter, then we need a dpkg NMU (Wichert? Ben?) before this can be placed in policy. wtf? when did the proposal change to "Source-Depends:"? there's no evidence of that in the logs. -- Joel Klecker (aka Espy)

Re: shlibs file changes proposal

us do not belong in the shlibs file. If upstream intends them to be used as shared libraries instead of dlopen()ed shared objects, they should have sonames. -- Joel Klecker (aka Espy)Debian GNU/Linux Developer mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTE

Re: Opinion on Debian freeze, FHS & IPv6

ides, ifconfig and route are standard commands that work on pretty much every system. There is some documentation now, but it is written in TeX. -- Joel Klecker (aka Espy)Debian GNU/Linux Developer mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://web.espy.org/> http://www.debian.org/>

Bug#42477: PROPOSED} delay the /usr/doc transition till after potato

I don't know why, but putting clauses in policy conditional on specific release names screams "wrong!" to me. ) with the Linux File system Hierarchy Standard (FHS). The latest version of this document can be found I formally object to thi

Bug#41232: Bug #41232: [AMENDMENT 1999-07-23] Build-time dependencies on binary packages

At 02:18 +0300 1999-08-07, Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho wrote: * Do we need to conditionalize the build dependencies based on architectures? - Joel Klecker and Marcus Brinkmann seem to think so. I'm not convinced yet. Well, I *need* that to represent glibc's sour

Re: FWD: /usr/doc vs. /usr/share/doc - the decision

urrent policy of making packages use /usr/share/doc. If this is such an issue, why is it that you objectors to /usr/doc -> /usr/share/doc with no transition did not object to the FHS amendment to policy as it was? -- Joel Klecker (aka Espy)Debian GNU/Linux Develop

Re: Bug#40706: Reasons for not moving at all

;t use /usr/share/doc until 3.0.0 was released, so I ask what is "foolish" about following policy? -- Joel Klecker (aka Espy)Debian GNU/Linux Developer mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://web.espy.org/> http://www.debian.org/>

Bug#41232: debian-policy: [PROPOSAL] Build-time dependencies on binary packages

d hurd-dev and gnumach-dev (at least, I think I do). I'm not sure how many other packages might need conditional source depends, this could be a specialized requirement. -- Joel Klecker (aka Espy)Debian GNU/Linux Developer mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Re: Architecture specification strings

field for one thing, the vendor field is for hardware vendor, not software. -- Joel Klecker (aka Espy)Debian GNU/Linux Developer mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://web.espy.org/> http://www.debian.org/>

Re: /var/lib, /var/mail

tween multiple hosts and multiple UNIX implementations (despite NFS locking issues). It is important to note that there is no requirement to physically move the mail spool to this location. However, programs and header files should be changed to use /var/mail. -- Joel Klecker (aka

Re: Debian conflicts with FHS on /usr/include/{linux,asm}

As for FHS, it is *wrong* plain and simple. -- Joel Klecker (aka Espy)Debian GNU/Linux Developer mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://web.espy.org/> http://www.debian.org/>

Re: Debian conflicts with FHS on /usr/include/{linux,asm}

netheless.] diversions do not work on directories. -- Joel Klecker (aka Espy)Debian GNU/Linux Developer mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://web.espy.org/> http://www.debian.org/>

Re: More FHS discussion (Was: Uploaded debhelper 2.0.09 (source all) to master)

X is still segregated for historical reasons. -- Joel Klecker (aka Espy)Debian GNU/Linux Developer mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://web.espy.org/> http://www.debian.org/>

Re: weekly policy summary

At 11:45 +0200 1999-06-14, Goswin Brederlow wrote: So every Package that uses gif would be depreciated, like gimp. It works perfectly without gif, but with gif support a bit better and gif support is non-free. It's only "non-free" in the US. -- Joel Klecker (aka Espy)

Re: On the disposition of old policy proposals

package. Would that be satisfactory? Sounds good. -- Joel Klecker (aka Espy)Debian GNU/Linux Developer mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://web.espy.org/> http://www.debian.org/>

Re: On the disposition of old policy proposals

anywhere. Is this intentional, or has it just been overlooked? -- Joel Klecker (aka Espy)Debian GNU/Linux Developer mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://web.espy.org/> http://www.debian.org/>

Re: Old bugs

At 19:27 +0100 1999-05-30, Julian Gilbey wrote: 20099 No policy on /etc/environment [Should we have one? A policy on it or even should we have it?] Status: Proposal We have several programs that use it, the problem is that there are at least two different expected formats. I'd sa

Bug#32448: debian-policy: policy(section 3.3.4) still suggests /etc/rc.boot instead of /etc/rcS.d

/etc/init.d/rcS; and should not necessarily be required to support all of the standard arguments. -- Joel Klecker (aka Espy)Debian GNU/Linux Developer mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://web.espy.org/> http://www.debian.org/>

Re: utmp group proposal

p name, even if not all use the same standard GID for that group. Is the "Linux Standards Base" project still alive? Red Hat has a utmp group. -- Joel Klecker (aka Espy)Debian GNU/Linux Developer mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> mailto:[EMAIL PRO

Re: software depending on non-US (was: Re: Hey! Why does everybody love flaming so much? [was: `pure'])

At 14:51 -0700 1999-05-09, Joseph Carter wrote: On Sat, May 08, 1999 at 05:30:26PM -0700, Joel Klecker wrote: >Very few stayed in main, but you can check the exact numbers yourself. Mostly due to SSLeay/OpenSSL being compiled with IDEA support, IIRC. I am not entirely convinced that it

Re: utmp group proposal

work properly, true, but UNIX98 ptys aren't why. The main problem is that 2.0 kernels do not support sigaltstack(), this causes such things as m4 to fail when run on a Linux 2.0 system if it was compiled on a glibc 2.1 system using 2.2 kernel headers. -- Joel Klecker (aka Espy)

Re: utmp group proposal

orrect, the UNIX98 pty interface in glibc 2.1 does not require a 2.2 kernel. grantpt() can use BSD ptys and the pt_chown program in the absence of kernel support for UNIX98 ptys. -- Joel Klecker (aka Espy)Debian GNU/Linux Developer mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Re: utmp group proposal

At 03:19 +0200 1999-05-09, Wichert Akkerman wrote: To solve this I propose we create an utmp group and put in policy that programs that want to modify the utmp should be setgid utmp instead of setuid root (unless root is needed for other purposes of course). Seconded. -- Joel Klecker (aka Espy

Re: software depending on non-US (was: Re: Hey! Why does everybody love flaming so much? [was: `pure'])

tware patent" exists). -- Joel Klecker (aka Espy)Debian GNU/Linux Developer mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://web.espy.org/> http://www.debian.org/>

Re: libtool's .la files

e package should be called > libltdl0 *sigh* I think I am confusing what the definition of "soname" is. [EMAIL PROTECTED]:[~]% objdump -p /lib/libc-2.1.1.so | awk '/SONAME/ {print $2}' libc.so.6 ^ That is the soname -- Joel Klecker (aka Espy)Debian G

Re: PROPOSAL: libtool archive (`*.la) files in `-dev' packages

I suggest not using the term versioning to refer to sonames, it is too easy to confuse it with symbol versioning. -- Joel Klecker (aka Espy)Debian GNU/Linux Developer mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://web.espy.org/> http://www.debian.org/>

Re: /var/mail vs. /var/spool/mail

systems have such a setup. -- Joel Klecker (aka Espy)Debian GNU/Linux Developer mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://web.espy.org/> http://www.debian.org/>

Re: FHS or FSSTND or NOTHING

e not only to move stuff from /var/adm/dpkg to /var/lib/dpkg, but convert it to a new format. I fail to see how "mkdir /var/state && mv /var/lib/dpkg /var/state/dpkg && ln -sf state /var/lib" (obviously there needs to be more error handling there) is somehow more diffic

Re: FHS or FSSTND or NOTHING

e point, no matter who that person is. LSB compliance will imply FHS compliance, and it would be a disaster if Debian was not LSB compliant. -- Joel Klecker (aka Espy) http://web.espy.org/> mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

FHS again (Re: slink is gone, goals for potato?)

At 13:23 +0100 1999-03-03, Santiago Vila wrote: On Wed, 3 Mar 1999, Joel Klecker wrote: I have already stated this several times, `info' has a large number of directories in its default INFOPATH, including /usr/share/info. Fine. Does this mean that we can already use /usr/share/info? How

Bug#32229: PROPOSED] libc-dev dependency in non-libc -dev packages

dency. -- Joel Klecker (aka Espy) http://web.espy.org/> mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Debian GNU/Linux PowerPC -- http://www.debian.org/ports/powerpc/>

Bug#32229: [PROPOSED] libc-dev dependency in non-libc -dev packages

uld remain backward compatible for the forseeable future, so the name 'libc-dev' should be safe for quite some time (and if that ever changes, we will need to formulate a migration plan anyway). -- Joel Klecker (aka Espy) http://web.espy.org/> mailto:[EMAIL

Bug#29770: Policy contradicts itself about /etc/aliases

m Mailer This MTA is rather easier to configure than smail or sendmail. It is a drop-in replacement for sendmail/mailq/rsmtp. Advanced features include the ability to reject connections from known spam sites, and an extremely efficient queue processing algorithm. -- Joel Klecker (aka Espy)

Re: FHS - transition

/lib/emacs/info:/usr/local/gnu/lib/emacs/info:/usr/local/lib/emacs/ info:/usr/local/emacs/info:." I would guess /usr/share/info would simply appear earlier in the search path if it were configured with "--infodir=/usr/share/info". -- Joel Klecker (aka Espy) mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTE

Re: Call for seconds: Policy modifications

lot of packages using -debian-linux though [7] I don't understand why we use "i486" for some things and "i386" for others though [8] Comment in config.sub: "# We use `pc' rather than `unknown' # because (1) that's what they normally are, and # (2) the word "unknown" tends to confuse beginning users." -- Joel Klecker (aka Espy) mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>http://web.espy.org/> Debian GNU/Linux user/developer on i386 and powerpc. mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.debian.org/>

Re: Configuration management and packages

At 15:02 -0700 1998-07-29, Joseph Carter wrote: >Seems like the thing to do is agree to and adjust policy such that preinst >does not interrupt the process (ie, no prompts) and modify dpkg to support >--unpack-only or similar.. dpkg already has --unpack -- Joel "Espy" Klecker mailto:[EMAIL PROTECT

Re: Bug#19797: libc6-dev: use of /tmp/*$$ in an insecure fashion

At 07:39 -0700 1998-06-15, Dale Scheetz wrote: >I will certainly patch the Debian version of the code, but it is not clear >that the upstream maintainer will wish to include this patch. It is my >understanding that the "tempfile" helper program is Debian specific, and >may not be available on all L

Re: Bug#19797: libc6-dev: use of /tmp/*$$ in an insecure fashion

At 14:09 -0700 1998-06-13, Dale Scheetz wrote: >I have forwarded your patch upstream, and, if Ulrich approves it, I will >certainly apply it to the release I am currently working on, otherwize I >would like to lower the severity to wishlist until the policy group makes >a determination of its impor

Re: Different versions of libc6-doc

At 02:30 -0800 1998-04-02, Guy Maor wrote: >Juan Cespedes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> Would it be possible for `dinstall' to have an `arch: all' >> package and some arch-specific packages with the same name? > >No, it can't handle that. I guess you call it it libc6-doc-sparc ? Maybe lib

Re: need input: essential packages and pre-depends

At 13:48 -0600 1998-03-24, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > However, in this case, I do see netbase uses ps in the > postinst to see if the daemaons are awake, and postgresql in the > preinst to see if the postmaster is running. So two packages use this > directly. > > In the latter case, it m

Re: need input: essential packages and pre-depends

At 11:48 +0100 1998-03-24, Santiago Vila wrote: >procps was essential in Debian 1.3.1, but it is not essential in hamm. >procps contains the important /bin/ps binary (which is certainly used in >maintainer scripts, either directly or indirectly through the init.d >scripts). Which packages have mai

Re: glibc_2.0.7pre1-3 uploaded to master

At 12:34 -0500 1998-03-03, Dale Scheetz wrote: >I understood this when I did it, and expected to identify the released >version as 2.0.7rel for this very reason. I consider that *much* uglier than an epoch. -- Joel "Espy" KleckerDebian GNU/Linux Developer

Re: Free software replacements for PGP and SSH (was: Re: are md5sums mandatory for all packages?)

Regarding "Re: Free software replacements for PGP and SSH (was: R" of 03:17 AM -0800 1997-12-21, Hamish Moffatt wrote: >On Sat, Dec 20, 1997 at 06:44:31PM -0800, Joel Klecker wrote: >> The PGP replacement is called G10, and the web page for that is at >> <http://ww

Free software replacements for PGP and SSH (was: Re: are md5sums mandatory for all packages?)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Regarding "Re: are md5sums mandatory for all packages?" of 10:31 AM -0800 1997-12-19, Scott Ellis wrote: >And the instant someone provides us with free software equivilant to ssh >or pgp, we'll move to use it. We need the functionality, unfortunatly >sometimes y

Re: are md5sums mandatory for all packages?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Regarding "Re: are md5sums mandatory for all packages?" of 10:31 AM -0800 1997-12-19, Scott Ellis wrote: >And the instant someone provides us with free software equivilant to ssh >or pgp, we'll move to use it. Kerberos is free software and it is more than equiv