Gunnar Wolf writes:
> It has been four months since the General Resolution 2022/vote_003 was
> voted¹, but it has not yet been completely adopted. The archive area was
> created and at least a package was uploaded to it in October, but it has
> not seen further movement. Two days ago, a call to a
Samuel Thibault writes:
> I didn't find a previous discussion on this: it would be useful to
> support negated architecture specifications in the debian/control
> Architecture field, so that we can e.g. write:
> Architecture: !s390 !s390x
> (for xorg stuff)
> Architecture: !hppa !hurd-any !kfre
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org
Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org).
> limit package debian-policy
Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy'
Limit currently set to '
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org
Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org).
> limit package debian-policy
Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy'
Limit currently set to '
Enrico Zini writes:
> Hello, and thank you for maintaining the Policy!
> Policy paragraph 4.9.1 has an example debian/rules which contains these
> lines:
>INSTALL_PROGRAM = $(INSTALL) -p-o root -g root -m 755
>ifeq (,$(filter nostrip,$(DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS)))
>INSTALL_PROGRA
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org
Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org).
> limit package debian-policy
Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy'
Limit currently set to '
Control: tags -1 pending
Max-Julian Pogner writes:
> consulting the debian policy manual whether it contains suggestions how
> to best implement diversions (see `man dpkg-divert`), i noticed syntax
> errors in the provided shell script example snippets.
> a patch fixing these typos is attached.
Processing control commands:
> tags -1 pending
Bug #1031403 [debian-policy] debian-policy: missing quotes in sh script example
in file policy/ap-pkg-diversions
Added tag(s) pending.
--
1031403: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1031403
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bu
On Sat, 09 Sep 2023 15:16:10 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> I'm therefore going to propose fixing this bug with the following patch,
> which is more aggressive than you propose.
>
> I think this is informative rather than normative and therefore
> technically doesn't require seconds, but I'll give
julien.pu...@gmail.com writes:
> Oh. I think I had two problems:
> (1) thinking "Replaces" meant "replaces" ;
> (2) thinking d/control controlled packages.
> Let me try to see if I'm getting at something:
> (*) Replaces doesn't really mean "can be used in place of"
> -- that would be express
Package: debian-policy
Version: 4.6.2.0
Severity: important
X-Debbugs-Cc: r...@debian.org
As part of reviewing #1039102, I took a detailed look at Policy 9.3
on system services and realized that it is largely obsolete and is
not followed by most Debian packages that provide system services.
Specif
Luca Boccassi writes:
> systemd upstream will drop support for the transitional sysv generator
> in the near future. The transition is long finished, it's been at least
> a decade, and it's time for the tail of packages still shipping only
> init scripts but not units to be updated.
> Tentativel
Russ Allbery writes:
> -If a service unit is not present, ``systemd`` uses dependency information
> -contained within the init scripts and symlinks in ``/etc/rcn.d`` to decide
> -which scripts to run and in which order. The ``sysv-rc`` runlevel system
> -for ``sysvinit`` uses the same symlinks i
Your message dated Sat, 09 Sep 2023 19:35:06 -0700
with message-id <87a5tu21t1@hope.eyrie.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#1030382: encourage Vcs-Git over other Vcs-* headers
has caused the Debian Bug report #1030382,
regarding encourage Vcs-Git over other Vcs-* headers
to be marked as done.
This
Luca Boccassi writes:
> Sure, updated as suggested.
I have a bunch of minor wording fixes that I'd want to make at this before
merging, but that should be straightforward to do. Before I invest the
time in that, I want to check the opinions of everyone else following
along and see if the semant
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org
Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org).
> limit package debian-policy
Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy'
Limit currently set to '
Hello everyone,
I come seeking your opinions. Please cc 885...@bugs.debian.org on replies
so that we can accumulate this discussion in a Debian Policy bug.
One of the responsibilities of the Policy Editors is to determine which
licenses should be included in /usr/share/common-licenses, and thus
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org
Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org).
> limit package debian-policy
Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy'
Limit currently set to '
Your message dated Sat, 09 Sep 2023 21:12:48 -0700
with message-id <87wmwyzmwv.fsf...@hope.eyrie.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#904608: Include upstream metadata spec in Policy
has caused the Debian Bug report #904608,
regarding Include upstream metadata spec in Policy
to be marked as done.
This me
Your message dated Sat, 09 Sep 2023 21:18:37 -0700
with message-id <87sf7mzmn6@hope.eyrie.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#830913: debian-policy: Allow amd64 systems without
/lib64
has caused the Debian Bug report #830913,
regarding debian-policy: Allow amd64 systems without /lib64
to be marked a
Your message dated Sat, 09 Sep 2023 21:23:52 -0700
with message-id <87o7iazmef@hope.eyrie.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#940234: debian-policy: add a section about source
reproducibility
has caused the Debian Bug report #940234,
regarding debian-policy: add a section about source reproducibilit
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org
Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org).
> limit package debian-policy
Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy'
Limit currently set to '
Your message dated Sat, 09 Sep 2023 21:28:34 -0700
with message-id <87jzsyzm6l@hope.eyrie.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#991984: Please document minimal environment variable
needed for sensible-utils
has caused the Debian Bug report #991984,
regarding Please document minimal environment variabl
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org
Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org).
> limit package debian-policy
Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy'
Limit currently set to '
Quoting Russ Allbery (2023-09-10 05:35:27)
> In order to structure the discussion and prod people into thinking about
> the implications, I will make the following straw man proposal. This is
> what I would do if the decision was entirely up to me:
>
> Licenses will be included in common-lice
On Sat, Sep 09, 2023 at 08:35:27PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Licenses will be included in common-licenses if they meet all of the
> following criteria:
>
> * The license is DFSG-free.
> * Exactly the same license wording is used by all works covered by it.
> * The license a
Hideki Yamane writes:
> Russ Allbery wrote:
>> Licenses will be included in common-licenses if they meet all of the
>> following criteria:
> How about just pointing SPDX licenses URL for whole license text and
> lists DFSG-free licenses from that? (but yes, we should adjust short
> n
27 matches
Mail list logo
