reassign 823766 debian-policy
thanks
On Sun, May 08, 2016 at 08:04:05PM +0200, Jörg-Volker Peetz wrote:
> Package: firefox
> Version: 46.0.1-1
> Severity: wishlist
>
> Dear Maintainer(s),
>
> how about an additional alternative x-www-browser.desktop of
> /usr/share/applications/firefox.deskt
On Thu, Nov 06, 2014 at 09:44:29AM +, Simon McVittie wrote:
> Package: debian-policy
> Severity: wishlist
>
> [X-Debbugs-Cc: ftpmas...@debian.org because I know the Policy maintainers
> don't actually control what is or isn't acceptable in the archive in this
> respect.]
>
> Some packages cur
On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 07:08:08PM -0400, Felipe Sateler wrote:
> > AFAIK, the current version of dpkg in stable supports symbols files, so
> > I think it is time we loosen the requirement for shlibs files when
> > symbols files are present.
> >
> > Requiring shlibs when there is a symbols file al
On Sat, Jul 10, 2010 at 12:36:14PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> It's not that these libraries will never have incompatible ABI changes, it's
> that they encode the ABI information in a non-standard way - the '4' in
> libnspr4 and the '3' in libnss3 do represent the sover, they just do it in a
> m
On Thu, Jul 08, 2010 at 10:10:51AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Russ Allbery writes:
>
> > 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.
On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 11:29:52AM +0100, Julien Cristau wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 09:34:50 +0100, Mike Hommey wrote:
>
> > Package: debian-policy
> > Version: 3.8.4.0
> > Severity: wishlist
> >
> > AFAIK, the current version of dpkg in stable supports
On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 01:52:15PM +0100, Bernhard R. Link wrote:
> * Mike Hommey [100227 23:53]:
> > AFAIK, the current version of dpkg in stable supports symbols files, so I
> > think it is time we loosen the requirement for shlibs files when symbols
> > files are prese
Package: debian-policy
Version: 3.8.4.0
Severity: wishlist
AFAIK, the current version of dpkg in stable supports symbols files, so I
think it is time we loosen the requirement for shlibs files when symbols
files are present.
Requiring shlibs when there is a symbols file also is error-prone, as wh
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 06:38:00PM +0100, Christian PERRIER wrote:
> Quoting Dmitry E. Oboukhov (un...@debian.org):
> > There are many packages in debian contain flag images.
>
>
> I think this whole thread answeredsomething that wasn't asked in
> your question (is is good or bad to use flags
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 10:06:02AM +1100, Ben Finney wrote:
> Moritz Muehlenhoff writes:
>
> > I would like to propose the following extension to "5.6.23.", the
> > "Homepage" header line:
>
> (That's “field”, by the way. There's no header in the control file, just
> paragraphs that contain fiel
On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 11:14:31PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Mike Hommey writes:
>
> > Is that any relevant ? I mean, the difference between rounding up and
> > rounding down is 1 KiB. Not even the size of an ext3 block. It makes
> > virtually no difference.
>
>
On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 05:36:23PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Ben Finney writes:
>
> > A peripheral point (already addressed earlier in this thread): It's
> > still ambiguous in that it doesn't specify in which direction the
> > rounding should occur.
>
> Did we resolve what rounding behavior
On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 11:17:03PM +0100, Roger Leigh wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 09:42:24AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> > Bill Allombert writes:
> > > On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 07:49:40PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> >
> > >> Agreed. At the time Policy was originally written, kilobyte nearl
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 01:04:59AM -0700, Steve Langasek
wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 01:06:54AM +0100, Roger Leigh wrote:
> > If one is using a tool such as git-buildpackage, the "debian" and
> > "upstream" branches are the *minimum* required information however.
>
> That sounds to me like
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 figure out what it should actually
> contain.
>
> I've liste
On Sun, Mar 22, 2009 at 12:55:58PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Well, the one thing that I think we need to clarify here is whether we
> need to list the licenses for files that aren't source code for what goes
> into the binary distribution, such as the build system. The files from
> Autoconf and
On Sat, Mar 14, 2009 at 02:30:59AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> ifeq (,$(findstring nostrip,$(DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS)))
> STRIP += -s
> LDFLAGS += -s
> INT_INSTALL_TARGET = install
> else
> INT_INSTALL_TARGET = install
> endif
I doubt dpkg-buildpackage sets LDFLAGS to -s. That would mean
On Tue, Jul 08, 2008 at 10:42:12AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> "Dmitry E. Oboukhov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > The list of packages with full text of MPL-license:
>
> Thank you for doing this search.
>
> By pure numbers, that's not a sufficient number of packages to warrant
> inclusion i
On Tue, Jul 08, 2008 at 09:55:32AM +0200, Mike Hommey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 08, 2008 at 11:39:36AM +0400, Dmitry E. Oboukhov <[EMAIL
> PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > The list of packages with full text of MPL-license:
>
> If you filter out packages fro
On Tue, Jul 08, 2008 at 11:39:36AM +0400, Dmitry E. Oboukhov <[EMAIL
PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The list of packages with full text of MPL-license:
If you filter out packages from the same source, that leaves:
> agsync: /usr/share/doc/agsync/MPL-1.1.txt.gz
> alexandria: /usr/share/doc/alexandria/MPL-1
On Mon, Jan 28, 2008 at 02:36:24PM +0100, Lucas Nussbaum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On 28/01/08 at 14:00 +0100, Mike Hommey wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 28, 2008 at 07:55:25AM +0100, Lucas Nussbaum <[EMAIL
> > PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On 27/01/08 at 23:00 +0100,
On Mon, Jan 28, 2008 at 07:55:25AM +0100, Lucas Nussbaum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On 27/01/08 at 23:00 +0100, Bill Allombert wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 25, 2008 at 07:31:02PM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> > > On Fri, 25 Jan 2008, Bill Allombert wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Jan 25, 2008 at 09:31:32AM +
On Sun, Jan 27, 2008 at 03:10:40PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 27, 2008 at 11:58:10PM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> > On Sun, 27 Jan 2008, Bill Allombert wrote:
> > > > > It does ? How a mailing list can upload package ? It seems you are
> > > > > using
> > > > > a functional fiel
On Mon, Dec 03, 2007 at 11:11:14PM +0100, Bill Allombert wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 01, 2007 at 10:13:49PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> > Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > #250202: [PROPOSAL] "debian/README.source" file for packages with
> > non-trivial source
> >
> > Bleh. This is kind
On Tue, Aug 07, 2007 at 11:55:54AM +0200, Loïc Minier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Aug 07, 2007, Neil Williams wrote:
> > the -dbg (with SONAME)
> [...]
> > provide a binary package
> > librarynamesoversion-dbg
> [...]
> > J
On Tue, Apr 24, 2007 at 09:49:55PM -0700, Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> totem-xine is a bug. It's including plugins in /usr/lib/totem in its
> shlibs file with bizarre SONAMEs. I'm not sure where the bug is, but I
> think it's legitimate for lintian to complain about it.
This becaus
On Wed, Mar 07, 2007 at 06:08:52PM +0100, Lucas Nussbaum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Bug #209008 proposed to have a common interface to tell packages to do
> parallel building (make -j).
>
> Not having this is a PITA for me, since I do rebuilds of the whole
> Debian archive on clusters
On Mon, Jan 15, 2007 at 03:10:53PM -0500, Michael Gilbert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Manoj wrote:
> > Why doe4s that not apply to iceweasel and gcc?
>
> iceweasel does the same to prevent updates to the debian package from
> upstream,
> but the user always has the option to download the prebu
On Sun, Nov 26, 2006 at 12:20:32PM -0800, Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Mike Hommey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Gabor Gombas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >> Because it is _NOT_ a bug in bash, it is a feature. AFAIR (it was some
> >
On Sun, Nov 26, 2006 at 04:02:45PM +0100, Gabor Gombas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 25, 2006 at 10:22:06AM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
>
> > This is an excellent example of doing the wrong thing, in my opinion.
> >
> > Why not fix the bash bug instead??
>
> Because it is _NOT_
On Sat, Nov 25, 2006 at 10:20:07AM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL
PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, 2006-11-25 at 09:51 +0200, Jari Aalto wrote:
> > Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > On Fri, 2006-11-24 at 23:55 +0200, Jari Aalto wrote:
> > > > > Instead of focusing and hamm
On Sat, Nov 25, 2006 at 09:51:37AM +0200, Jari Aalto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> And this is only possible if scripts use
>
> /bin/sh
>
> The /bin/sh could be any valid shell that provided the standard set
> of features.
>
> The installation system ("Essential") which sets /bin/sh to poin
On Thu, Nov 23, 2006 at 10:45:18PM +0100, Lucas Nussbaum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Package: debian-policy
> Version: 3.7.2.2
> Severity: wishlist
>
> Hi,
>
> Some source packages generate binary packages using the same name as
> another source package. For example, see the 'qd' source package
On Thu, Nov 23, 2006 at 04:42:45PM +0100, Bill Allombert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 23, 2006 at 01:15:28AM +0200, Jari Aalto wrote:
> > I would drop that "special" case and always require explicit
> > requirement for the shell. It's more clear to see which packages
> > "need" bash to
On Thu, Nov 16, 2006 at 10:03:27AM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL
PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 2006-11-16 at 09:44 +0100, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > * Thomas Bushnell BSG ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [061116 09:35]:
> > > On Thu, 2006-11-16 at 09:30 +0100, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > > > * [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, Nov 06, 2006 at 09:01:27AM -0800, Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Mike Hommey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >> + the -a and -o test operators
> >> +must be supported
>
On Sun, Nov 05, 2006 at 07:41:40PM -0800, Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> + the -a and -o test operators
> + must be supported
Why is that needed ?
Mike
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED
On Thu, Oct 05, 2006 at 12:28:11PM -0700, Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Mike Hommey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Bill Allombert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >> \usepackage[shameless]{plug}
> >> \begin{plug}
> >> I have
On Thu, Oct 05, 2006 at 08:28:06PM +0200, Bill Allombert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 05, 2006 at 10:44:53AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> > However, the current debian-policy statement about clean is:
> >
> > This must undo any effects that the build and binary targets may have
>
On Monday 01 September 2003 23:16, Josip Rodin wrote:
> And that they are unwilling to conform, unlike everyone else. Issues should
> be fixed (e.g. by patching the packaging system and whatever else), not
> blithely ignored by putting whatever the fuck one wants in the control
> file.
That's why
On Monday 01 September 2003 17:56, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 31, 2003 at 04:59:43PM +0200, Denis Barbier wrote:
> > Some control files contain non-ASCII characters, there is no reason not
> > to mandate UTF-8 instead of random encodings.
>
> It will display incorrectly on the vast majori
41 matches
Mail list logo
