> "Seth" == Seth Arnold <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Seth> And, as far as I can tell, yes, it is always true that
Seth> usually it is an error for two packages to contain duplicate
Seth> files when both can be installed on a system.
Except for when the package uses the "Replaces: "
On Sun, May 13, 2001 at 01:13:50PM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote:
> >> I'm not talking about editing config files here. I'm more interested in
> >> programs that invoke /usr/bin/editor.
>
> > Well, see Policy section 12.4. "Editors and pagers".
>
> Your point being?
Okay, I'll try this step by step.
On Sun, May 13, 2001 at 01:54:08PM +0200, Josip Rodin wrote:
>
> That is, ae, which is required. In another place, Policy says:
>
> `required' packages are necessary for the proper functioning of
> the system. You must not remove these packages or your system
> may
On Sun, May 13, 2001 at 10:25:15PM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote:
> > That is, ae, which is required. In another place, Policy says:
> >
> > `required' packages are necessary for the proper functioning of
> > the system. You must not remove these packages or your system
> >
Chris Waters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Sun, May 06, 2001 at 07:31:43PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
>> - A change in the policy to remove the obsolete /usr/doc symlinks.
>
>This is supposed to happen once enough packages make the transition.
>Now, if we're really down to 253 packages that use /us
Now that we're getting ready for a new release, I'd like to implement
this new policy in the new development stream. Here is the text I plan
to include in the necessary bug reports I'll submit.
I don't forsee any difficulties with the upgrade path. Please let me
know if you think I missed someth
Hi Brian!
On Sun, 13 May 2001, Brian White wrote:
> There is new Debian policy regarding the use of "cgi-bin" in web servers.
> The basic issue is that many webmasters expect to have this directory
> available for their own use and not have it taken over by the system to be
> used by the various
Hisham Ismail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I'm just a plain Debian fan and I like to print t-shirts for myself and
>my collegues with debian official logo on it. These t-shirts are not
>mean for sale. Is it possible?.
There's no problem at all with using the open use logo in that way. The
official
Josip Rodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> A solution would be some sort of an essential virtual package that
> editors would provide, but that's not viable, either. So we're
> stuck. :)
Why is that not viable?
Do the following:
* Make all the different editor packages provide the virtual packag
On Sun, May 13, 2001 at 12:38:05PM -0700, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
>
> * Create a real package "editor-proxy", which depends on "editor", and
> is marked Essential.
You don't even have to do that. Just make base-files depend on it. It
already depends on awk anyway.
--
Debian GNU/Linux 2.2
On Sun, May 13, 2001 at 12:38:05PM -0700, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> > A solution would be some sort of an essential virtual package that
> > editors would provide, but that's not viable, either. So we're
> > stuck. :)
>
> Why is that not viable?
>
> Do the following:
>
> * Make all the diffe
Josip Rodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, May 13, 2001 at 12:38:05PM -0700, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
>> Why is that not viable?
>>
>> Do the following:
>>
>> * Make all the different editor packages provide the virtual package
>> "editor".
>> * Create a real package "editor-proxy", wh
On Sat, May 12, 2001 at 08:19:05PM -0700, Karl M. Hegbloom wrote:
>
> Is this always true?
>
> 7.5.1 Overwriting files in other packages
>
> Firstly, as mentioned before, it is usually an error for a package to
> contain files which are on the system in another package, though
> currently th
Previously Julian Gilbey wrote:
> The CVS version no longer has the part "though currently ..." as this
> is not currently true.
That default will never change in the dpkg code anymore as well, instead
the installer will have to put that in /etc/dpkg/dpkg.cfg.
Wichert.
--
___
14 matches
Mail list logo
