Re: To Russ Allbery 2017-08-24 <20170824171653.r24gyar5mikyj...@msg.df7cb.de>
> $ grep-dctrl -F Provides editor -nsPackage
> /var/lib/apt/lists/deb_debian_dists_sid_main_binary-amd64_Packages | xargs
> deutex edbrowse emacs25 emacs25-lucid emacs25-nox fte-console
> fte-terminal fte-xwindow jed xje
Re: Russ Allbery 2017-08-24 <87efs1lyc7@hope.eyrie.org>
> Oh, thank you! For some reason, apt-cache rdepends didn't show any of
> those packages. All of them except dnsvi are Suggests, which basically
> doesn't accomplish anything.
>
> Copying myon on this message as maintainer of dnsvi, whi
Re: Russ Allbery 2017-08-30 <87k21lj7id@hope.eyrie.org>
> Paride Legovini writes:
> > On Fri, 25 Aug 2017 10:09:34 +0200 Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
>
> >> Nano is priority important which means it will be installed by default
> >> and someone who explicitly uninstalls nano will probably also inst
Re: Russ Allbery 2017-12-26 <87wp1as3na@hope.eyrie.org>
> 1. Status quo: there is an undocumented editor virtual package, Policy
>says that nothing has to provide or depend on it, and some random
>collection of editors provide it. I think this is a bad place to be,
>so I would hope
Re: Ian Jackson 2018-10-11 <23487.15460.144648.495...@chiark.greenend.org.uk>
> The problem with doc-base is not that it is a bad idea, it's that it's
> not comprehensive enough.
The problem with doc-base is that no one is using it. It had 20 years
to become adopted. Let's move on instead of tryin
Package: debian-policy
Version: 4.5.0.0
Severity: wishlist
Yesterday I was looking for a document to show upstream why Debian
thinks embedded code copies are bad. I started with looking in policy,
but completely missed section "4.13. Convenience copies of code"
because it doesn't mention "embed".
Re: Helmut Grohne
> On Sun, Feb 28, 2021 at 10:53:20AM -0700, Sean Whitton wrote:
> > Can you post a patch just doing the moving manpages to dependencies part
> > and indicate that you are seeking seconds? Then we can get that
> > applied.
>
> I call for seconds on:
>
> --- a/policy/ch-docs.rst
Re: roucaries bastien
> The problem is the base64 encoded binary.
I agree that base64 there is weird, but does that really need an
explicit mention in the policy? If I were you, I'd just remove that
weirdness and move along.
Christoph
Re: Russ Allbery 2008-03-30 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> The control field for specifying admin, net, utils, etc. is "Section", so
> >> I think Policy wins here and main, contrib, and non-free should be called
> >> categories.
>
> > For what it's worth, and possibly to add more confusion, dak uses the
* Clarify the difference between Build-Depends and Build-Depends-Indep in
+Section 7.6.
+
+ -- Christoph Berg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sun, 18 Sep 2005 12:56:02 +0200
+
debian-policy (3.6.2.1) unstable; urgency=low
* Bug fix: "debian-policy: Typo in upgrading-checklist.txt.gz", thank
Package: debian-policy
Version: 3.6.2.1
Severity: minor
Hi,
8.6.4 is slightly confusing: in 8.6, it says "when a package is built
which contains any shared libraries, it must provide a `shlibs' file
for other packages to use".
The 'must' should be repeated in 8.6.4, now it only says "If your
pac
Re: Bill Allombert in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > - There is no Build-Depends-Arch; the autobuilders will
> > > - only need the Build-Depends if they know how to build
> > > - only build-arch and binary-arch. Anyone building the
> > > + Build-Depends is essentially "Build-Dep
12 matches
Mail list logo
