Branden Robinson schrieb:
> * the part of a package with X-specific components must have a priority no
> higher than the packages on which it depends (including any X packages);
> * an X-dependent alternative version of a package must have a priority no
> higher than the packages on which it de
On Sun, Mar 25, 2001 at 04:49:45PM +0200, Josip Rodin wrote:
> Additionally, I'd like to point out that two packages have already been
> split out of tetex packages to correct this accident, texinfo[1] and
> texi2html, and this hasn't caused any major problems (readjustment of a
> couple of depende
On Sun, Mar 25, 2001 at 12:11:00PM -0500, Bob Hilliard wrote:
> "Marcelo E. Magallon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > In the case of emacs20:
> > bah. The binary is 3 MB large. The package is 28 MB large. You could
> > leave the X-capable binary in emacs20 and move everything else,
> > inc
On Sun, Mar 25, 2001 at 09:14:33PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
> Thank you, the wording in the current policy seems to imply that
> providing alternate frontends is an option only open to higher-priority
> packages, whereas this is much clearer. Seconded.
Thanks for your support. I would like to m
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Branden Robinson) wrote:
>--- policy.sgmlSun Mar 25 01:34:33 2001
>+++ policy.sgml.x-support Sun Mar 25 01:55:07 2001
>@@ -5946,14 +5946,15 @@
> Programs for the X Window System
>
>
>-Programs that
On Sun, 25 Mar 2001, Branden Robinson wrote:
> --- policy.sgml Sun Mar 25 01:34:33 2001
> +++ policy.sgml.x-support Sun Mar 25 01:55:07 2001
> @@ -5946,14 +5946,15 @@
> Programs for the X Window System
>
>
> - Programs that may be configured with support for the X Wi
On Sun, Mar 25, 2001 at 12:11:00PM -0500, Bob Hilliard wrote:
> "Marcelo E. Magallon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > bah. The binary is 3 MB large. The package is 28 MB large. You could
> > leave the X-capable binary in emacs20 and move everything else,
> > including a terminal only emacs-20
"Marcelo E. Magallon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > In the case of emacs20:
>
> bah. The binary is 3 MB large. The package is 28 MB large. You could
> leave the X-capable binary in emacs20 and move everything else,
> including a terminal only emacs-20.7 binary to emacs20-base or
> emacs
On Sun, Mar 25, 2001 at 02:45:44PM +0200, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
> > Have you checked lately to see how many programs within it *actually*
> > depend on the X libraries?
>
> Splitting xdvi off tetex-bin shouldn't be much of a problem. If memory
> serves well, it's there because of an hist
>> Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Package: debian-policy
> Version: 3.5.2.0
> Severity: wishlist
>
> This proposal does not change the intended meaning of the existing policy;
> it simply brings the wording of the existing policy (whose origins date
> back to very early ver
>> Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Have you checked lately to see how many programs within it *actually*
> depend on the X libraries?
Splitting xdvi off tetex-bin shouldn't be much of a problem. If memory
serves well, it's there because of an historical accident. Back when
D
> standard
> These packages provide a reasonably small but not too limited
> character-mode system. This is what will install by default if the user
> doesn't select anything else. It doesn't include many large applications,
> but it does include Emacs (this is more of a piece of infrastruc
On Sun, Mar 25, 2001 at 06:58:29PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 25, 2001 at 03:50:34AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > You seem to be explicitly ignoring the third option (the first listed).
> > Why?
>
> *shrug* It's not clear to me that it's possible in these cases.
In the case
On Sun, Mar 25, 2001 at 05:54:08PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 25, 2001 at 01:57:53AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > + requirements when using the X Window System. If such a package
> > + is of higher priority than the X packages on which it depends, it
> > + is requi
On Sun, Mar 25, 2001 at 01:57:53AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> + requirements when using the X Window System. If such a package
> + is of higher priority than the X packages on which it depends, it
> + is required that either the X-specific components be split into a
> +
Package: debian-policy
Version: 3.5.2.0
Severity: wishlist
This proposal does not change the intended meaning of the existing policy;
it simply brings the wording of the existing policy (whose origins date
back to very early versions of the Debian Policy Manual) into line with
Policy 1.1 as more r
16 matches
Mail list logo
