Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> reassign 42399 debian-policy
Bug#42399: lintian should only check for shared libs in system dirs
Bug#65345: lintian treats all .so files as shared libraries
Bug reassigned from package `lintian' to `debian-policy'.
> reassign 35762 debian-policy
Bug#35
On Sat, Feb 17, 2001 at 01:38:11PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> Actually there are two reasons why unstable should change just for the
> freeze. They're complementary.
>
> If you don't fork frozen (ie, maintain unstable and frozen independently),
> then if you upload major changes to unstable, yo
* Julian Gilbey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010218 05:00]:
> Why suddenly change the model like this? Would the following not be
> better and perhaps less confusing, still using a four-tier setup:
>
> stable frozen testing unstable
>
> Initially, frozen is set to be the same as testing, and we ca
On Sun, Feb 18, 2001 at 12:57:53PM +, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> Why suddenly change the model like this?
The model's already changed: we went from
stable
frozen (temporary)
unstable
to
stable
testing (permanent)
unstable
> Would the following
CVSROOT:/cvs/debian-policy
Module name:debian-policy
Changes by: jdg Sun Feb 18 06:23:26 PST 2001
Modified files:
. : policy.sgml upgrading-checklist.html
debian : changelog
Log message:
* Add XFree86 app-defaults ammendment c
CVSROOT:/cvs/debian-policy
Module name:debian-policy
Changes by: jdg Sun Feb 18 06:37:35 PST 2001
Modified files:
. : policy.sgml
Log message:
Correct -> in policy.sgml app-defaults patch
Hi,
On Sat, 17 Feb 2001, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote:
> I agree in general with what you are saying. However the language is still
> poor. I suspect that section 7 is really trying to say -- 'A source package
> may
> require a binary package to be installed in order to build correctly. If it
Your message dated Sun, 18 Feb 2001 14:07:40 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Fixed in 3.5.1.0
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to
On Mon, Feb 19, 2001 at 12:23:04AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 18, 2001 at 12:57:53PM +, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> > Why suddenly change the model like this?
>
> The model's already changed: we went from
>
> stable
> frozen (temporary)
> unstable
>
> to
>
>
Package: debian-policy
Version: 3.5.1.0
Severity: important
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
debian-policy still recommends packaging-manual which was recently
removed because it is now part of debian-policy. Therefore,
debian-policy should either drop the recommendation, or should
i
CVSROOT:/cvs/debian-policy
Module name:debian-policy
Changes by: jdg Sun Feb 18 14:18:47 PST 2001
Modified files:
debian : changelog control
Log message:
Fix packaging-manual recommendation
> "Julian" == Julian Gilbey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Julian> Why suddenly change the model like this? Would the
Julian> following not be better and perhaps less confusing, still
Julian> using a four-tier setup:
I tend to agree.
Basically the proposal is to map:
unstable
> "Anthony" == Anthony Towns writes:
Anthony> --nFreZHaLTZJo0R7j Content-Type: text/plain;
Anthony> charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline
Anthony> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Anthony> This is somewhat confused.
Anthony> "testing" is maintained by
13 matches
Mail list logo
