Hello,
On Tue 09 May 2023 at 01:44AM +01, Luca Boccassi wrote:
> I've done an initial attempt to define the wording, although I'm sure
> it will need quite a few changes. Attached as a patch, and also
> available on Salsa:
>
> https://salsa.debian.org/bluca/policy/-/commits/tmpfiles
>
> Happy to
Hello,
On Mon 08 May 2023 at 12:52PM -07, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Sean Whitton writes:
>> On Mon 08 May 2023 at 08:48AM -07, Russ Allbery wrote:
>
>>> In other words, dpkg-divert is primarily for local administrators,
>>> non-Policy-compliant local packages that are doing unusual things, and
>>> t
Hello Luca,
On Mon 08 May 2023 at 08:07PM +01, Luca Boccassi wrote:
> The specific difference, for which I think an explicit call out is
> needed, is because these config files are shipped by some packages but
> are not used _by_ them, they are consumed by systemd (or udev, or
> kmod, etc). Speci
On Sun, 4 Jun 2023 at 12:02, Sean Whitton wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> On Tue 09 May 2023 at 01:44AM +01, Luca Boccassi wrote:
>
> > I've done an initial attempt to define the wording, although I'm sure
> > it will need quite a few changes. Attached as a patch, and also
> > available on Salsa:
> >
> > ht
On Sun, 4 Jun 2023 at 11:54, Sean Whitton wrote:
>
> Hello Luca,
>
> On Mon 08 May 2023 at 08:07PM +01, Luca Boccassi wrote:
>
> > The specific difference, for which I think an explicit call out is
> > needed, is because these config files are shipped by some packages but
> > are not used _by_ the
On Sun, 4 Jun 2023 at 12:25, Luca Boccassi wrote:
>
> On Sun, 4 Jun 2023 at 11:54, Sean Whitton wrote:
> >
> > Hello Luca,
> >
> > On Mon 08 May 2023 at 08:07PM +01, Luca Boccassi wrote:
> >
> > > The specific difference, for which I think an explicit call out is
> > > needed, is because these co
(Newly cc'd elogind maintainers: Please see #945269 for context)
On Sun, 04 Jun 2023 at 12:15:41 +0100, Luca Boccassi wrote:
> On Sun, 4 Jun 2023 at 12:02, Sean Whitton wrote:
> > On Tue 09 May 2023 at 01:44AM +01, Luca Boccassi wrote:
> > > For now I've kept only a mention of the 'systemd-tmpfil
On Sun, Jun 04, 2023 at 12:25:54PM +0100, Luca Boccassi wrote:
> If you prefer, I can reword the general rule to be stricter, ie:
> "packages must not use diversions where native mechanisms are
> available" or so. Would this be better?
"native mechanisms" seems to vague.
Cheers,
--
Bill.
Imagi
On Sun, 4 Jun 2023 19:39:49 +0200 Bill Allombert
wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 04, 2023 at 12:25:54PM +0100, Luca Boccassi wrote:
> > If you prefer, I can reword the general rule to be stricter, ie:
> > "packages must not use diversions where native mechanisms are
> > available" or so. Would this be better
On Sun, 4 Jun 2023 at 14:56, Simon McVittie wrote:
>
> (Newly cc'd elogind maintainers: Please see #945269 for context)
>
> On Sun, 04 Jun 2023 at 12:15:41 +0100, Luca Boccassi wrote:
> > On Sun, 4 Jun 2023 at 12:02, Sean Whitton wrote:
> > > On Tue 09 May 2023 at 01:44AM +01, Luca Boccassi wrote
10 matches
Mail list logo
