Bug#580135: marked as done ([debian-policy] 12.7 Changelog files shouldn't advise the use of lynx)

Your message dated Fri, 11 Aug 2017 12:44:51 -0700 with message-id <87o9rlx51o@iris.silentflame.com> and subject line Closing inactive Policy bugs has caused the Debian Bug report #580135, regarding [debian-policy] 12.7 Changelog files shouldn't advise the use of lynx to be mar

Bug#580135: 12.7 Changelog files shouldn't advise the use of lynx

@@ HTML, it should be made available in that form as /usr/share/doc/package/changelog.html.gz and a plain text changelog.gz should be generated - from it using, for example, lynx -dump -nolist. If + from it using, for example, html2text -nobs or lynx -

Bug#580135: [debian-policy] 12.7 Changelog files shouldn't advise the use of lynx

On Mon, 03 May 2010, David Prévot wrote: > In order to include upstream changelog distributed in HTML, and convert > it as a plain text changelog.gz, policy should advise the use of > html2txt (which debhelper already depends on) rather than lynx that has > fewer chance to already be on Build-Depen

Bug#580135: [debian-policy] 12.7 Changelog files shouldn't advise the use of lynx

and a plain text changelog.gz should be generated - from it using, for example, lynx -dump -nolist. If + from it using, for example, html2text. If the upstream changelog files do not already conform to this naming convention, then this may be achieved

Bug#241333: marked as done (Mandate UTF-8 for changelog files)

Your message dated Thu, 12 Mar 2009 04:47:02 + with message-id and subject line Bug#241333: fixed in debian-policy 3.8.1.0 has caused the Debian Bug report #241333, regarding Mandate UTF-8 for changelog files to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt

Bug#241333: Mandate UTF-8 for changelog files

Kurt Roeckx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Seconded. Thanks to you and Guillem for the review. Applied. -- Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PRO

Bug#241333: Mandate UTF-8 for changelog files

The format of the debian/changelog allows the > package building tools to discover which version of the package > is being built and find out other release-specific information. > @@ -1582,6 +1604,10 @@ > > > > + The entire changelog

Bug#241333: Mandate UTF-8 for changelog files

t; @@ -1473,10 +1499,6 @@ > > > > - > - > - > - >The format of the debian/changelog allows the > package building tools to discover which version of the package > is being built and fi

Bug#241333: Mandate UTF-8 for changelog files

cific information. @@ -1582,6 +1604,10 @@ + The entire changelog must be encoded in UTF-8. + + + For more information on placement of the changelog files within binary packages, please see .

Bug#241333: Mandate UTF-8 for changelog files

Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > This drops the hyperlink for UTF-8 pointing to the RFC; I don't think > the fact that UTF-8 is now pervasive has made this irrelevant. (That > is, I don't know how relevant it was in the first place, but if it was > relevant before, why isn't it releva

Bug#241333: Mandate UTF-8 for changelog files

On Sat, Jul 05, 2008 at 03:18:31PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > Changing all changelog files in the archive to UTF-8 is already complete, > so this change will catch Policy up with current reality. Seconds? > diff --git a/policy.sgml b/policy.sgml > index 24c9072..9e7e1fb 10

Bug#241333: Mandate UTF-8 for changelog files

Changing all changelog files in the archive to UTF-8 is already complete, so this change will catch Policy up with current reality. Seconds? diff --git a/policy.sgml b/policy.sgml index 24c9072..9e7e1fb 100644 --- a/policy.sgml +++ b/policy.sgml @@ -1473,10 +1473,6

Re: Bug#13503 acknowledged by developer (libc6 lacks ChangeLog files)

es all but changlog.6 > which is information that is a year old. I see no reason to clutter up the > docs with ancient information. I think we need some policy on this. The libc6 package has several changelog files (about 1.5 Mb in total) starting in July 1991, but our package shows only

Re: Changelog files

On Fri, 5 Dec 1997, Hamish Moffatt wrote: > On Wed, Dec 03, 1997 at 12:30:26AM +0100, Juan Cespedes wrote: > > > > Are you sure it's quicker to do `ls' first to know how that > > changelog is named, and after `less', that to always do `zless'? > > You can use zless on non-compressed files, a

Re: Changelog files

On Wed, Dec 03, 1997 at 12:30:26AM +0100, Juan Cespedes wrote: > > - I have 486 machines here where a gzip invocation causes a delay. I prefer > > small files (and > > that means most files since most files are small) to be uncompressed. > > Speed is a major > > issue on those machines. > >

Re: Changelog files

On Fri, 28 Nov 1997, Christoph Lameter wrote: > Reasons for not compressing changelogs <4K: > > - After compression the file is still occupying 1 allocation unit. There is > no space saving. [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~# dumpe2fs /dev/sda1 | grep "Block size" dumpe2fs 1.10, 24-Apr-97 for EXT2 FS 0.5b, 9

Re: Changelog files

x27;t remember that discussion. Perhaps you can give us some pointers (dates, bug reports, etc.). Anyways, the current policy manual (2.3.0.1) says in section 5.3, Additional documentation: ... text documentation should be ... compressed with gzip -9 unless it is small. However, section 5.8,

Re: Changelog files

I am rather surprised at this statement. There was a discussion last fall on the issue and it was settled that debstd's behavior was satisfying the policy. Is there any newfound reason for compressing small changelogs? The policy should clearly say what should be done (not wasting space) but not s

Re: Changelog files

Christoph Lameter wrote: > Reasons for not compressing changelogs <4K: > > - After compression the file is still occupying 1 allocation > unit. There is no space saving. I wonder if there lies the root of the disagreement. You see, the default unit of allocation for ext2fs is 1024 bytes, not 40

Re: Changelog files

Hi! What's the intention of this (silly) discussion? Policy is very clear that the changelog file has to be compressed no matter how large it is. Someone provided a patch for debstd which makes it comply with this policy. So the only reason for discussion would be to change the policy. Is tha

Re: Changelog files

You are right. I took the liberty of being inaccurate as Juan was. He posted before stating the complete issue with no reponse. Reasons for not compressing changelogs <4K: - After compression the file is still occupying 1 allocation unit. There is no space saving. - I have 486 machines here wh

Re: Changelog files

On Wed, 19 Nov 1997, Christoph Lameter wrote: > As you know well by now Juan: debstd compresses changelogs. So please state > the > issue accurately. Yes, it compresses _some_ of the changelogs. Not all of them. -- Juan Cespedes

Re: Changelog files

Christoph Lameter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > As you know well by now Juan: debstd compresses changelogs. So > please state the issue accurately. Umm, not always it doesn't. If you're going to ask people to be accurate, please do the same yourself. If the changelog is small it won't be compre

Re: Changelog files

d changelogs. : So what? If they are against current policy, we should : either fix them, or fix the Policy. And I think the current Policy is : fine respecting to changelog files. : -- : Juan Cespedes -- --- +++ --- +++ --- +++ --- +++ --- +++ --- +++ --- +++ --- Please always CC me when reply

Re: Changelog files

ing to changelog files. -- Juan Cespedes

Re: Changelog files

A quick scan on Contents.gz showed that 552 packages come with uncompressed changelogs. Please respect my hardisk, we did not buy it together ;-) -- Ioannis Tambouras [EMAIL PROTECTED], West Palm Beach, Florida Signed pgp-key on key server.

Changelog files

Can anyone tell me, please, if all the changelog files should be compressed? I think that's pretty clear in section 5.8 of the Debian Policy, but Christoph Lameter always closes the bugs against his packages for not doing so. -- Juan Cespedes