On Sat, 4 Jan 2025 12:15:55 +0100 Bill Allombert wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 04, 2025 at 10:28:55AM +, Sean Whitton wrote:
> > > But for /usr/share/man and /usr/share/info, what to do ?
> >
> > Well, patch the program not to require the files. I'm not sure there's
> > any very general advice we cou
/usr/share/man,
/usr/share/info, and /usr/share/locale.
- Josh Triplett
>From e6461cfaa9e8389ec64cc4cad1a3f5b406d65b69 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
Message-ID:
From: Josh Triplett
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2024 10:01:33 -0800
Subject: [PATCH] Document that packages should not require man / info / locale
fi
Sean Whitton wrote:
> On Sat 07 Dec 2024 at 04:45pm -08, Josh Triplett wrote:
> > Anecdata aside, one other way to evaluate this is to look at the type of
> > files packages store under /usr/share/locale.
> >
> > A look at the Contents file gives a complete list of what
On Fri, Dec 06, 2024 at 10:43:34AM +0800, Sean Whitton wrote:
> On Thu 05 Dec 2024 at 10:13am -08, Josh Triplett wrote:
> > Package: debian-policy
> > Version: 4.7.0.1
> > Severity: wishlist
> > Tags: patch
> > X-Debbugs-Cc: j...@joshtriplett.org
> >
>
Bill Allombert wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 05, 2024 at 10:13:24AM -0800, Josh Triplett wrote:
>> Package: debian-policy
>> Version: 4.7.0.1
>> Severity: wishlist
>> Tags: patch
>> X-Debbugs-Cc: j...@joshtriplett.org
>>
>> Packages already tend to avoid requi
ugs on any packages.
>From c0069a143c349375201273f3d25b676f501e85e2 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
Message-ID:
From: Josh Triplett
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2024 10:01:33 -0800
Subject: [PATCH] Document that packages cannot require man / info / locale
files
Packages already tend to avoid requiring any files fr
Sean Whitton wrote:
> On Tue 26 Mar 2024 at 10:11am -06, Sam Hartman wrote:
> > I tend to agree with Sean that your rationale is not convincing.
> > It sounds like you want to use policy as a stick to hit people
> > over the head and say "policy is not a stick."
>
> This was basically my concern.
On Sat, Mar 23, 2024 at 12:08:10PM +0800, Sean Whitton wrote:
> Thanks. For the time being, I myself am not convinced. Policy is not a
> stick to beat maintainers with, as we say, but I'm not sure that idea is
> one that ought to be in Policy itself.
Having observed many attempts to use Policy a
On Mon, Mar 18, 2024 at 05:38:15PM +0800, Sean Whitton wrote:
> Was there some recent packaging situation that prompted you to think
> about this? I'm cautious about adding it in the absence of that.
Mostly, recent discussions in various places regarding whether packages
are required to use *cron
ble on Salsa at:
https://salsa.debian.org/josh/policy/-/tree/no-implicit-requirements
diff --git a/policy/ch-scope.rst b/policy/ch-scope.rst
index a279c26..047cdf8 100644
--- a/policy/ch-scope.rst
+++ b/policy/ch-scope.rst
@@ -25,6 +25,12 @@ Debian policy does not mean that it is not a bug, let al
Sean Whitton wrote:
> On Sun 17 Sep 2023 at 10:52am -07, Russ Allbery wrote:
> > So far as I can tell, the only important part is that the directory
> > be registered in tmpfiles.d (or a service unit) so that it can be
> > recreated when needed.
>
> Something which I don't think has been mentioned
On Mon, Sep 11, 2023 at 07:11:30PM +0100, Simon McVittie wrote:
> Games are often written for performance more than correctness, and
> frequently do non-ideal things or have unfixed security issues. If we
> separate them into /usr/games and avoid putting that directory in root's
> PATH, then tab co
On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 11:56:19AM -0700, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> Javier Serrano Polo wrote:
> > On Wed, 30 Sep 2020 18:34:06 -0700 Jonathan Nieder
> > wrote:
>
> >> Even so, some *rough* consensus on the plan is very useful for
> >> helping people evaluate that first step.
> >
> > Here is a rou
On Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 05:23:38PM -0700, jrnie...@gmail.com wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Josh Triplett wrote:
>
> > Over the years, "Essential" has made it difficult to reduce installation
> > size, to reduce chroot/container size, or to coordinate various
> >
On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 05:15:45PM +0200, Javier Serrano Polo wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Mar 2020 08:00:04 -0700 Josh Triplett > wrote:
> > This change does not propose eliminating the concept of Essential,
>
> What is the point of Essential? To omit declaring dependencies on the
ate Policy, technically), and soften language that
connects "base system" with "essential".
This change does not propose eliminating the concept of Essential, nor
does it propose that any specific package become non-Essential.
Patch attached; also available at
https://salsa.debian
states "this flag must not be used unless absolutely
> >> necessary" and later "You must not tag any packages essential before
> >> this has been discussed on the debian-devel mailing list and a consensus
> >> about doing that has been reached".
> >
Russ Allbery wrote:
> I think Josh is arguing that ideally we'd slowly move towards declaring
> dependencies on essential packages explicitly, so we should indicate that
> in Policy and, as a first step, say that we're not adding any entirely new
> functionality to the essent
an exception for all existing Essential
packages, as well as for new packages introduced to transition from
existing Essential packages. (This policy shouldn't, for instance,
prevent Essential packages from splitting or combining.)
Does this seem reasonable?
- Josh Triplett
On Sun, 29 Sep 2019 12:03:11 +0200 Bill Allombert wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 28, 2019 at 06:02:52PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> > Sean Whitton writes:
> >
> > > I don't currently have any reason to doubt we have a project consensus
> > > that systemd unit files should be included in packages in addit
Russ Allbery wrote:
> Andrey Rahmatullin writes:
> > Text relocations are forbidden at least on amd64 though.
> > https://stackoverflow.com/questions/7865059/why-does-gcc-force-pic-for-x64-shared-libs
>
> Yeah, but I believe not on i386.
>
> This is really a very 32-bit, x86-specific problem.
Als
On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 08:13:52AM +0100, Ansgar wrote:
> Josh Triplett writes:
> > diff --git a/policy/ch-files.rst b/policy/ch-files.rst
> > index 48410be..1cdcb18 100644
> > --- a/policy/ch-files.rst
> > +++ b/policy/ch-files.rst
> > @@ -722,6 +722,15 @@ The
entually, as we configure most applications for this default, we could
introduce this into policy as a "should", but for now I'm seeking
interest in slowly adapting applications to shift defaults to unified
logging.
- Josh Triplett
On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 01:18:53PM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Josh Triplett writes ("Bug#920692: Packages must not install files or
> directories into /var/cache"):
> > It's well-established in Debian (but not documented in Policy) that
> > packages must not i
On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 01:20:31PM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Ian Jackson writes ("Re: Bug#920692: Packages must not install files or
> directories into /var/cache"):
> > Josh Triplett writes ("Bug#920692: Packages must not install files or
> > directories i
94eca4860fe51994f6 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Josh Triplett
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2019 11:39:10 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] Packages must not install files or directories into
/var/cache
---
policy/ch-files.rst | 9 +
1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)
diff --git a/policy/ch-files.rst b/policy/
On Sat, Oct 20, 2018 at 10:09:17AM -0700, Sean Whitton wrote:
> On Wed 17 Oct 2018 at 01:47AM -0700, Josh Triplett wrote:
> > Which is a good argument for them not being in /etc.
>
> Do we need to block this Policy change on moving these files out of
> /etc?
No, certainly not
On Sun, 7 Oct 2018 16:25:39 -0700 Paul Hardy wrote:
> Package: base-files
> Severity: wishlist
> Tags: patch
>
> Hello,
>
> I recently formatted the Unicode Data license for the d/copyright file
> of a Debian package that I created. I thought I would offer it to
> Debian if you are interested.
On Wed, 17 Oct 2018 08:48:54 +0200 Ansgar Burchardt wrote:
> Josh Triplett writes:
> > Which effectively means the admin should never delete any existing entry
> > in the file, only add their own.
>
> It's a configuration file that is not supposed to ever be chan
On Tue, Oct 16, 2018 at 12:01:35AM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Josh Triplett writes ("Bug#904248: Beginnings of a patch to add netbase to
> build-essential"):
> > On Mon, 15 Oct 2018 13:39:32 +0100 Ian Jackson
> > wrote:
> > > My proposed wording about "
On Mon, 15 Oct 2018 13:39:32 +0100 Ian Jackson
wrote:
> Bill Allombert writes ("Bug#904248: Beginnings of a patch to add netbase to
> build-essential"):
> > What about the fact that these files are conffiles ?
>
> What about it ?
>
> My proposed wording about "longstanding and conventionally a
On Sat, 4 Aug 2018 06:06:22 +0100 Ian Jackson
wrote:
> Package: debian-policy
> Version: 4.2.0.1
> Tags: patch
>
> Apropos of discussion in #813471:
>
> Paul writes:
> > In addition, d-i relies on access to the apt repo for the system.
> > I can imagine other uses of that, so I added a carve-ou
On Fri, 29 Dec 2017 11:29:00 + Niels Thykier wrote:
> Here is an initial draft for how I think it could look.
>
> Review welcome.
[...]
> +The `gain root command` is passed to the build script via the
> +``DPKG_GAIN_ROOT_CMD`` environment variable. It is space separated
> +list with the fir
On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 09:37:32PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> This is okay 80% of the time and badly needs manual editing the remaining
> 20% of the time. I personally would never be willing to forgo good
> changelogs in that remaining 20% of the time that can't really be handled
> with commit m
y arguing that they make it a pain to keep
a Debian package in git, and that we ought to autogenerate them from git
log and some care taken in commit messages.
- Josh Triplett
On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 06:56:53PM -0800, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> Josh Triplett wrote:
> > On Fri, 1 Dec 2017 00:04:20 +0100 Bill Allombert
> > wrote:
>
> >> The fact that some upstream do not bother to ship useful changelog does
> >> not mean that all ch
e pain.
Now, a NEWS file or similar, containing user-visible *release notes* and
similar highlights, would most certainly be useful. I would love to see
*more* upstreams providing files like those. But those certainly aren't
changelogs.
- Josh Triplett
Ian Jackson wrote:
> If there is a core implementation needed (eg a library which parses a
> standard config location or soemthing), I expect to to write it.
I sincerely hope we can avoid needing to develop some new infrastructure
or library here, since any such mechanism would almost certainly in
On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 06:54:32PM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Josh Triplett writes ("Re: Automatic downloading of non-free software by
> stuff in main"):
> > - Packages in main must not point the user to specific non-free or
> > contrib software and recommend it
Ian Jackson wrote:
> Over the years, d-legal has discussed a number of packages which
> automatically download non-free software, under some circumstances.
>
> The obvious example is web browsers with extension repositories
> containing both free and non-free software.
>
> We have also recently d
On Fri, 21 Nov 2014 10:30:13 +0100 Alexandre Detiste
wrote:
> The policy should mention how to handle systemd native timers
> to avoid these kind of bugs in the future;
> when other packages will start shipping native timers.
>
> Here is the spirit of this change:
>
> +To maintaint compatabilit
On Mon, 11 Sep 2017 14:41:12 +0100 Ian Jackson
wrote:
> Sean Whitton writes ("Steps towards a patch to document disabling a daemon
> upon installation"):
> > [draft policy text]
> > > +The default behaviour is to enable autostarting your package's daemon.
> > > +If the daemon should not be autos
On Mon, 4 Sep 2017 10:03:47 +0200 Mattia Rizzolo wrote:
> Package: debian-policy
> Version: 3.9.8
>
> I use the `wrap-and-sort` tool to keep my list of dependencies neatly
> sorted and wrapped. In particular, I use the `-t` flag to have a
> trailing comma at the end of the list. For example
>
On Fri, 11 Aug 2017 16:31:09 +0200 Axel Beckert wrote:
> Sean Whitton wrote:
> > The latest version of the FHS does not have /usr/games, so merging this
> > with the bug about updating our FHS version.
>
> Meh.
>
> From my point of view we should continue to keep /usr/games/ for games
> as that
On Wed, 05 Jul 2017 18:05:01 +0200 Johannes Schauer wrote:
> Package: debian-policy
> Version: 3.9.8.0
> Severity: wishlist
>
> According to https://packages.debian.org/unstable/ there exists the
> section "javascript" filled with 1050 packages. But the "javascript"
> section is missing from the
On Tue, 6 Dec 2016 15:07:13 +0100 Andreas Henriksson wrote:
> Get rid of "script" as that doesn't properly describe the equivalent for
> systems using declarative replacements.
>
> Also drop "the" as via update-rc.d you're potentially/likely interfacing
> with multiple ones at a time. Possibly t
/tmp which is permitted as long as temporary
Instead of hardcoding /tmp, this should recommend using $TMPDIR, with
fallback to /tmp if and only if $TMPDIR not set.
- Josh Triplett
nd library crates for the Rust programming language
Thanks,
Josh Triplett
On Sat, Sep 24, 2016 at 12:57:04PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Josh Triplett writes:
>
> > Based on some conversations on #debian-devel on the purpose of
> > x-window-manager (as launched by
> > /etc/X11/Xsession.d/50x11-common_determine-startup), it seems like a
>
On Sat, Sep 24, 2016 at 11:44:25AM -0700, Josh Triplett wrote:
> Package: debian-policy
> Severity: normal
>
> Policy 11.8.4 documents how to set the priority for an x-window-manager
> alternative. The algorithm for doing so increases the priority for
> window managers supporti
Package: debian-policy
Severity: normal
Policy 11.8.4 documents how to set the priority for an x-window-manager
alternative. The algorithm for doing so increases the priority for
window managers supporting the Debian menu system, but doesn't say
anything about the freedesktop menu system. (And,
[Please CC me on replies, as I didn't receive this mail, and just
happened to see it in the archives.]
On Mon, 22 Aug 2016 13:38:42 +0100 George Bateman
wrote:
> I'm currently making my first package, Processing. It's a GUI teaching
> tool for (usually Java) programming, with its own standard li
On Mon, Aug 08, 2016 at 06:37:41PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Josh Triplett writes:
> > On Mon, Aug 08, 2016 at 11:53:37AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
>
> >> I don't think this is a good idea. This license is extremely short,
> >> and it has a ton of mino
On Mon, Aug 08, 2016 at 05:10:52PM +0100, Simon McVittie wrote:
> On Sun, 07 Aug 2016 at 21:00:12 -1000, Josh Triplett wrote:
> > Numerous packages use the MIT/Expat license, and currently all of those
> > packages need to include it in their copyright files.
>
> Although P
On Mon, Aug 08, 2016 at 11:53:37AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Josh Triplett writes:
>
> > Numerous packages use the MIT/Expat license, and currently all of those
> > packages need to include it in their copyright files. I'd love to see
> > this license added
DEALINGS IN THE SOFTWARE.
Proposed diff to Policy in git-format-patch form:
- 8< -
>From 31949fd85228459d3236f34f144aa2475934044c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Josh Triplett
Date: Sun, 7 Aug 2016 20:57:12 -1000
Subject: [PATCH] Add the MIT/Expat license to common-licenses
-
On Wed, May 04, 2016 at 12:41:25AM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> On 03.05.2016 22:50, Josh Triplett wrote:
> > Debian Policy requires the use of -fPIC for shared libraries, but
> > documents potential exceptions for libraries with position-dependent
> > assembly, and for
fault as of the last stable release, I think
we may want to reevaluate the conventional wisdom. Perhaps this
information might help support the current iteration of any proposals to
adopt more hardening flags by default, for instance.
- Josh Triplett
ving it up to the maintainer's discretion how much the
prospective user of a package will want the corresponding -doc package.
- Josh Triplett
-- System Information:
Debian Release: stretch/sid
APT prefers unstable
APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (1, 'experimental')
Architect
o
comment on splash screens, first-time wizards, and similar.
> I do think this is iffy from a DFSG #7 perspective, since it's forcing the
> user to agree to the additional license, but I'm not sure we've ever
> discussed that in general.
That thought crossed my mind as w
On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 08:17:05PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Josh Triplett writes:
> > I don't intend this as a slippery slope; I very specifically want to
> > cover the types of annoyances mentioned in the above paragraph, which
> > almost no software in Debian a
On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 11:08:18AM +0200, Sune Vuorela wrote:
> On Sunday 14 October 2012 23:50:21 Josh Triplett wrote:
> > =
> > Software in Debian should not prompt users to explicitly agree to
> > licenses, disclaimers, or terms of service in order to run that
> &g
On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 01:08:01AM +0200, Leo 'costela' Antunes wrote:
> Josh, next time please keep me CC on such emails to avoid uncoordinated
> work. I hadn't seen this and also wrote -legal for insight (and CCd
> you), which might be a bit redundant.
Sorry about that
quot; rather than a "must" for now, because
I know of one package that already does this, and I don't intend for
this change to make any package immediately rc-buggy. The one package I
know of that does this, Transmission, I've already filed a bug on (bug
689095).
- Josh Tri
ow Suggests, perhaps it would
make a better example here. In any case, dselect now by no means
represents the most popular dpkg frontend.
- Josh Triplett
-- System Information:
Debian Release: lenny/sid
APT prefers unstable
APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (1, 'experimental'
The big announcement is coming out very soon and this one is going to
triple in a matter of days. Did they strike the mother load? We can't say.
All we can say for now is that this revelation is going to be huge, and will
cause a rush on this issue. The time to get in is now!
Price: $O.77
P
interest, please
respond to the address below, or visit our web site.
Please send to:
If by e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
If by mail:
WebStream Internet Solutions
Outsourcing Department
2200 W.Commercial Blvd. Suite 204
Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33309 USA
Thank you very much.
Josh Winters
[EMAIL
category...
And to be able to sort like this, task packages might need to be created
differently to contain all the necessary information...
And I just pulled those defaults out of the air ;)
-
Josh
Andrew McMillan wrote:
>...
> The idea of having tasks within tasks that someone suggested
68 matches
Mail list logo
