On Mon, 31 May 1999, Edward Betts wrote:
> On policy, Santiago Vila <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Among other things: Old awk is not guaranteed to have user-defined
> > functions (if I'm not mistaken).
> >
> > However, I have yet to see an awk packaged for Debian
> > which is not a new awk.
>
>
> On Mon, 31 May 1999, Julian Gilbey wrote:
>
> > Santiago Vila wrote:
> > > However, since every awk in the system is always a new awk and it is
> > > always available as awk, we could standarise the expectations and declare
> > > that every time a program in a Debian system needs any awk (either
On policy, Santiago Vila <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Among other things: Old awk is not guaranteed to have user-defined
> functions (if I'm not mistaken).
>
> However, I have yet to see an awk packaged for Debian
> which is not a new awk.
original-awk ?
--
I consume, therefore I am
On policy, Santiago Vila <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Yes, I see what you are saying, but why should we worry about tweaking
> > upstream software in various packages (and who knows which they'll end
> > up being?) to use "awk" instead of "nawk" when we can simply provide a
> > nawk -> awk symlin
On Mon, 31 May 1999, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> Santiago Vila wrote:
> > However, since every awk in the system is always a new awk and it is
> > always available as awk, we could standarise the expectations and declare
> > that every time a program in a Debian system needs any awk (either old or
> >
> > > > Does anyone expect there to be a nawk program? If so, this suggestion
> > > > is moot. If not, we can probably just do away with it.
> > >
> > > Debian currently has five nawk scripts:
> > > [...]
> > > I see no reason to refrain from keeping the nawk link around.
> > > I also don't thin
On Sun, 30 May 1999, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> > Julian Gilbey wrote:
> > > Does anyone expect there to be a nawk program? If so, this suggestion
> > > is moot. If not, we can probably just do away with it.
> >
> > Debian currently has five nawk scripts:
> >
> > /usr/sbin/mk-accessdb and /usr/sbi
On Sun, 30 May 1999, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> > I do not withdraw the bug: If every awk in the system is already a "new
> > awk", why do we need /usr/bin/nawk at all?, we could use always
> > /usr/bin/awk and it would always work.
> >
> > Is there a rationale somewhere?
> >
> > Maybe we should che
> Julian Gilbey wrote:
> > Does anyone expect there to be a nawk program? If so, this suggestion
> > is moot. If not, we can probably just do away with it.
>
> Debian currently has five nawk scripts:
>
> /usr/sbin/mk-accessdb and /usr/sbin/mk-relaydb in sharc
> /usr/doc/texmf/mkhtml.nawk in tet
Julian Gilbey wrote:
> Does anyone expect there to be a nawk program? If so, this suggestion
> is moot. If not, we can probably just do away with it.
Debian currently has five nawk scripts:
/usr/sbin/mk-accessdb and /usr/sbin/mk-relaydb in sharc
/usr/doc/texmf/mkhtml.nawk in tetex-base
/usr/doc
> > Santiago Vila wrote:
> > > The bug:
> > > ===
> > >
> > > The /usr/doc/debian-policy/virtual-package-names-list.text.gz file says:
> > >
> > > awk Anything providing suitable /usr/bin/{awk,nawk}
> > >
> > > So: Is "nawk" an approved virtual package name or not? It app
retitle 34652 Policy is not clear enough about nawk.
thanks
On Tue, 16 Mar 1999, Richard Braakman wrote:
> Santiago Vila wrote:
> > The bug:
> > ===
> >
> > The /usr/doc/debian-policy/virtual-package-names-list.text.gz file says:
> >
> > awk Anything providing suitable /
On Tue, 16 Mar 1999, Richard Braakman wrote:
> Santiago Vila wrote:
> > The bug:
> > ===
> >
> > The /usr/doc/debian-policy/virtual-package-names-list.text.gz file says:
> >
> > awk Anything providing suitable /usr/bin/{awk,nawk}
> >
> > So: Is "nawk" an approved virtual
Santiago Vila wrote:
> The bug:
> ===
>
> The /usr/doc/debian-policy/virtual-package-names-list.text.gz file says:
>
> awk Anything providing suitable /usr/bin/{awk,nawk}
>
> So: Is "nawk" an approved virtual package name or not? It appears in the
> right-hand side but no
Package: debian-policy
[ Note: I think this bug should be fixed before Bug #34428 ].
The bug:
===
The /usr/doc/debian-policy/virtual-package-names-list.text.gz file says:
awk Anything providing suitable /usr/bin/{awk,nawk}
So: Is "nawk" an approved virtual package name
15 matches
Mail list logo
