The package description still contains:
This package contains:
- Debian Policy Manual
- Linux Filesystem Structure (FSSTND)
Julian
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Julian Gilbey, Dept of Maths, QMW, Univ. of London. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi,
>>"Joey" == Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Joey> I see the following items marked as accepted amendments in the
Joey> policy weekly summary that arn't in the new revision:
I essentially looked at the forwarded bugs titled [ACCEPTED ...]
this time round.
Joey> Definition o
I see the following items marked as accepted amendments in the policy weekly
summary that arn't in the new revision:
Definition of extra priority (#33076)
Policy still suggests /etc/rc.boot instead of /etc/rcS.d (#32448)
Have proposal-submitting guidelines in policy package
I understand you didn'
Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> we proipose to follow the latter, since that would mean that we
Not quoit roight. :-)
--
see shy jo
Edward> The locations of debian-policy and the packaging manual do not
Edward> meet the FHS, they should be changed to /usr/share/doc/ not
Edward> /usr/doc/.
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I was thinking about that. One of the problems with that is that
> this may mean that the pol
Hi,
>>"Marco" == Marco d'Itri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Marco> Did you look at the FHS 2.1 draft?
I am aware of it, yes.
Marco> Some of the new things in FHS 2.0 like /var/state have been
Marco> removed from the standard and there is no point putting them
Marco> in the policy.
Hi,
Please retitle this bug into an [ACCEPTED] state in the BTS,
(changing the priority as well, like the other reports), in order to
get it included.
manoj
The stages in a proposals life
a) Pre discussion period, an idea is
floated, and kicked around and wishlist bu
Hi,
>>"Edward" == Edward Betts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Edward> How about /usr/doc/debian-policy/upgrading-checklist.text.gz?
Done.
Edward> The locations of debian-policy and the packaging manual do
Edward> not meet the FHS, they should be changed to /usr/share/doc/
Edward> not /u
On Jun 30, Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> capitalization of The X Window System in section heading. Any other
> flaws? Shall I renumber it to 3.0.0.0 and send it along?
Did you look at the FHS 2.1 draft? Some of the new things in FHS 2.0
like /var/state have been removed from the s
On 29 Jun 1999, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> At long last, I have created a new policy version, the one
> that is destined to be version 3.0.0.0. As promised, I am not
> uploading this package, but presenting it here in order that people
> have a first look at it and make su
On Tue, 29 Jun 1999, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> At long last, I have created a new policy version, the one
> that is destined to be version 3.0.0.0. As promised, I am not
> uploading this package, but presenting it here in order that people
> have a first look at it and make sure I have
On debian-policy, Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
> >>"Wichert" == Wichert Akkerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Wichert> Manoj, what happened to the utmp-group proposal? I don't see it
> Wichert> mentioned in the changelog..
>
> Actually, going in to add this t the
Hi,
>>"Wichert" == Wichert Akkerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Wichert> Manoj, what happened to the utmp-group proposal? I don't see
Wichert> it mentioned in the changelog..
I'll get to it in the next try, 2.5.1.91. In the meanwhile,
does everything else look OK?
manoj
--
Hi,
>>"Wichert" == Wichert Akkerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Wichert> Manoj, what happened to the utmp-group proposal? I don't see it
Wichert> mentioned in the changelog..
Actually, going in to add this t the document, I notice thast
the amendment was already in, the bug was that I
On Tue, Jun 29, 1999 at 04:37:06PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> At long last, I have created a new policy version, the one
> that is destined to be version 3.0.0.0. As promised, I am not
> uploading this package, but presenting it here in order that people
> have a first look at it a
Manoj, what happened to the utmp-group proposal? I don't see it
mentioned in the changelog..
Wichert.
--
==
This combination of bytes forms a message written to you by Wichert Akkerman.
E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
WWW: ht
On Tue, Jun 29, 1999 at 04:37:06PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> At long last, I have created a new policy version, the one
> that is destined to be version 3.0.0.0.
I can see no entry for 3.0.0.0 in the upgrade checklist. Please make one.
--
%%% Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho % [EMAIL PROT
Hi folks,
At long last, I have created a new policy version, the one
that is destined to be version 3.0.0.0. As promised, I am not
uploading this package, but presenting it here in order that people
have a first look at it and make sure I have not made major
mistakes. http://www.debian
18 matches
Mail list logo
