> Looking for seconds.
I'll give you 60 if you just wait me a minute...
er.. I mean.. seconded.
On Thu, Apr 06, 2000 at 02:39:07PM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote:
> I modify my proposal so that it reads as follows:
>
>The easy way to achieve this behavior is to make the configuration
>file a conffile. This is appropriate only if it is possible to distribute a
>default version that wi
On Thu, Apr 06, 2000 at 02:39:07PM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote:
> I modify my proposal so that it reads as follows:
>
>The easy way to achieve this behavior is to make the configuration
>file a conffile. This is appropriate only if it is possible to distribute a
>default version that wi
On Thu, 6 Apr 2000, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 06, 2000 at 10:36:04AM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote:
> >file a conffile. This is only appropriate if it is possible to
> > distribute a
> [...]
>
> It would be more grammatical to say "appropriate only" rather than "only
> appropriate",
On Thu, Apr 06, 2000 at 10:36:04AM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote:
> Final rewording:
>
> I propose that we modify paragraph in Policy 4.7.3 by adding the "only"
> word, so that it reads as follows:
>
>The easy way to achieve this behavior is to make the configuration
>file a conffile. This i
Final rewording:
I propose that we modify paragraph in Policy 4.7.3 by adding the "only"
word, so that it reads as follows:
The easy way to achieve this behavior is to make the configuration
file a conffile. This is only appropriate if it is possible to distribute a
default version that
On Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 11:45:09AM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote:
> > How about we add `(only)', to have it read
> > This is appropriate (only) if it is possible to distribute a
> > default version that will work for most installations, [...]
> > ?
>
> I like this idea.
>
> How about we add `only'
On Sat, 1 Apr 2000, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Santiago Vila writes ("Bug#61308: PROPOSAL] Initializing databases by using
> conffiles."):
> > The problem I see is that the paragraph is worded in positive sense:
> >
> > "This is appropriate if it is possible t
>>"Santiago" == Santiago Vila <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Santiago> \begin{proposal} Do not initialize a database by using the
Santiago> conffile mechanism, unless the package containing the
Santiago> database provides it `complete' and it is usually not
Santiago> updated by other packages (ex
Santiago Vila writes ("Bug#61308: PROPOSAL] Initializing databases by using
conffiles."):
> The problem I see is that the paragraph is worded in positive sense:
>
> "This is appropriate if it is possible to distribute a
> default version that will work for most install
On Wed, 29 Mar 2000, Steve Greenland wrote:
> It's already in violation of policy. From section 4.7.3:
>
> "The other way to do it is to via the maintainer scripts. In this case,
> the configuration file must not be listed as a conffile and must not be
> part of the package distribution."
> [...]
> The following proposal tries to address cases like Bug #34294.
>
> \begin{proposal}
> Do not initialize a text database by using the conffile mechanism.
> \end{proposal}
>
> Rationale: We should try to reduce prompting to a minimum during upgrades.
> 99,999% users will always say "No" to dpkg p
Steve Greenland wrote:
> On 29-Mar-00, 10:32 (CST), Peter S Galbraith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
> :
> > Perhaps that's because (Slink) policy says:
> >
> > 4.7. Configuration files
> >
> >
> > Any configuration files created or used by your package should reside
>
On 29-Mar-00, 10:32 (CST), Peter S Galbraith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Perhaps that's because (Slink) policy says:
>
> 4.7. Configuration files
>
>
> Any configuration files created or used by your package should reside
> in `/etc'. If there are several you
On 29-Mar-00, 08:40 (CST), Santiago Vila <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Mar 2000, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> > In particular,
> > given the update-mime program, /etc/mailcap should obviously not be a
> > conffile. And as it is, the maintainer should change that -- but
> > changing policy isn
Santiago Vila wrote:
> I also think this proposal should not be needed, but considering that
> nobody managed so far to convince the mime-support maintainer that
> /etc/mailcap being a conffile is really bad, it seems it is.
Perhaps that's because (Slink) policy says:
4.7. Configuration files
-
On Wed, Mar 29, 2000 at 02:47:10PM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Mar 2000, Anthony Towns wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Mar 29, 2000 at 02:10:54PM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote:
> > > \begin{proposal}
> > > Do not initialize a text database by using the conffile mechanism.
> > > \end{proposal}
> >
On Wed, 29 Mar 2000, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> I think this proposal is silly: for something like the cases you
> mention, it is obvious that they should not be conffiles, but should
> be created by the postinst if they do not already exist. It would
> clearly be very stupid for these to be conffile
On Wed, 29 Mar 2000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 29, 2000 at 02:47:10PM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote:
> > > > \begin{proposal}
> > > > Do not initialize a text database by using the conffile mechanism.
> > > > \end{proposal}
> > > What is a `text database' ? That term seems very unclear to me
On Wed, Mar 29, 2000 at 02:47:10PM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote:
> > > \begin{proposal}
> > > Do not initialize a text database by using the conffile mechanism.
> > > \end{proposal}
> > What is a `text database' ? That term seems very unclear to me; but
> > based on the bug report I'd certainly be ha
On Wed, 29 Mar 2000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 29, 2000 at 02:10:54PM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote:
> > \begin{proposal}
> > Do not initialize a text database by using the conffile mechanism.
> > \end{proposal}
>
> What is a `text database' ? That term seems very unclear to me; but
> based
On Wed, Mar 29, 2000 at 02:10:54PM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote:
> \begin{proposal}
> Do not initialize a text database by using the conffile mechanism.
> \end{proposal}
What is a `text database' ? That term seems very unclear to me; but
based on the bug report I'd certainly be happy to second somet
Package: debian-policy
Version: 3.1.1.1
Severity: wishlist
The following proposal tries to address cases like Bug #34294.
\begin{proposal}
Do not initialize a text database by using the conffile mechanism.
\end{proposal}
Rationale: We should try to reduce prompting to a minimum during upgrades.
23 matches
Mail list logo
