On Sun, Apr 29, 2001 at 05:05:08PM -0700, Daniel Schepler wrote:
> Is this an inconsistency with the above quote from section 7.6, which
> uses the word "may"?
Yes.
Julian
--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Julian Gilbey, Dept of Maths
Your message dated Mon, 30 Apr 2001 09:25:19 +0100
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line debian-policy_3.5.4.0_i386.changes INSTALLED
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 i
Your message dated Mon, 30 Apr 2001 09:25:19 +0100
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line debian-policy_3.5.4.0_i386.changes INSTALLED
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 i
Your message dated Mon, 30 Apr 2001 09:25:19 +0100
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line debian-policy_3.5.4.0_i386.changes INSTALLED
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 i
Your message dated Mon, 30 Apr 2001 09:25:19 +0100
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line debian-policy_3.5.4.0_i386.changes INSTALLED
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 i
Your message dated Mon, 30 Apr 2001 09:25:19 +0100
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line debian-policy_3.5.4.0_i386.changes INSTALLED
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 i
On Fri, Apr 27, 2001 at 01:03:09PM +0200, Josip Rodin wrote:
> > Manoj and I are only two people. Handling policy bugs is hard for a
> > number of reasons:
> >
> > (1) There are a lot of them, and many of them are now quite long.
> >
> > (2) We don't have any official editorial rights, so unless
CVSROOT:/cvs/debian-policy
Module name:debian-policy
Changes by: jdg Mon Apr 30 05:58:54 PDT 2001
Modified files:
. : policy.sgml
Log message:
* Finished updates to chapter 7
* Scrapped chapter 8 (but preserved so that the rest of policy doesn't
change
On Sat, Apr 28, 2001 at 12:18:46PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> I made one posting with such a list, but I've been swamped
> recently. I can start an automated posting of a list; with the master
> list being in policy CVS so that either Julian or I can updfate it;
> people can send me
On 20010430T000601-0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> Now you're tempting me to go make a package that builds without using
> those nasty "helper" programs dpkg-deb, dpkg-gencontrol, and
> dpkg-shlibdeps.. :-P
You could probably do without the latter two, but IIRC the deb format
is internal to dpkg and dpkg
severity 79538 fixed
retitle 79538 [REJECTED] Include FDL in common-licenses
thanks
The dh_make package no longer has this bug. So as there is no
consensus at this stage to include the FDL in common-licenses, I am
going to mark this proposal as rejected.
Julian
--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
severity 79451 fixed
retitle 79541 [OLD PROPOSAL] include the apache license in base-files
Since there has been no progress on this proposal, I'm marking it as
an old proposal.
Julian
--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Julian Gilbey, D
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> severity 60974 wishlist
Bug#60974: xemacs20 and the console
Severity set to `wishlist'.
> merge 60979 87994
Bug#60979: What /etc/init.d/xxx restart does?
Bug#87994: [PROPOSAL] better initscript definition, and adding
'restart-if-running'
Mismatch - on
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> severity 79451 fixed
Bug number 79451 not found.
> retitle 79541 [OLD PROPOSAL] include the apache license in base-files
Bug#79541: include the apache license in base-files
Changed Bug title.
> Since there has been no progress on this proposal, I'm ma
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> severity 79538 fixed
Bug#79538: [PROPOSED] FDL is missing from common-licenses
Severity set to `fixed'.
> retitle 79538 [REJECTED] Include FDL in common-licenses
Bug#79538: [PROPOSED] FDL is missing from common-licenses
Changed Bug title.
> thanks
Sto
Your message dated Mon, 30 Apr 2001 21:15:04 +0100
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#87159: explanation of Build-Depends et. al. is unclear
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
CVSROOT:/cvs/debian-policy
Module name:debian-policy
Changes by: jdg Mon Apr 30 14:08:36 PDT 2001
Modified files:
. : menu-policy.sgml mime-policy.sgml
perl-policy.sgml policy.sgml
upgrading-checklist.html
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> severity 60979 wishlist
Bug#60979: What /etc/init.d/xxx restart does?
Severity set to `wishlist'.
> merge 60979 87994
Bug#60979: What /etc/init.d/xxx restart does?
Bug#87994: [PROPOSAL] better initscript definition, and adding
'restart-if-running'
Mer
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> severity 79541 fixed
Bug#79541: [OLD PROPOSAL] include the apache license in base-files
Severity set to `fixed'.
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Darren Benham
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)
Package: debian-policy
Version: 3.5.3.0
Severity: normal
The debian-policy manual now includes what used to be in the separate
packaging-manual package, but the description remains unchanged. I was
momentarily confused, and would appreciate it if a suitable note were
in the package description so
20 matches
Mail list logo
