On Tue, Jun 20, 2006 at 09:05:18AM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le mardi 20 juin 2006 à 06:47 +0200, Andreas Barth a écrit :
> > > So it's _no more_ used (it's commented out) but it relies on dpkg-query -L
> > > instead.
> > Which *is* an official interface.
> And TTBOMK, dpkg is not guarante
Le mardi 20 juin 2006 à 06:47 +0200, Andreas Barth a écrit :
> > So it's _no more_ used (it's commented out) but it relies on dpkg-query -L
> > instead.
>
> Which *is* an official interface.
And TTBOMK, dpkg is not guaranteed to be reentrant, thus such interfaces
shouldn't be used inside maintain
* Raphael Hertzog ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [060620 01:20]:
> On Mon, 19 Jun 2006, Matthias Klose wrote:
> > Raphael Hertzog writes:
> > > What Josselin is criticizing is the fact that python-central heavily
> > > relies on the P-V field, it looks it up in /var/lib/dpkg/status and also
> > > uses /var/li
On Mon, 19 Jun 2006, Matthias Klose wrote:
> Raphael Hertzog writes:
> > What Josselin is criticizing is the fact that python-central heavily
> > relies on the P-V field, it looks it up in /var/lib/dpkg/status and also
> > uses /var/lib/dpkg/info/package.list to find out files to byte-compile.
> >
* Josselin Mouette ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [060619 13:49]:
> Le lundi 19 juin 2006 à 13:28 +0200, Andreas Barth a écrit :
> > > Calling /bin/false doesn't entirely break the system.
> >
> > It seems that you are unaware with the way dpkg works. If a package's
> > postinst fails, the package is marked
Raphael Hertzog writes:
> Indeed but the number of postinst failures due to python-central have been
> quite high recently. python-central is quite new and nobody helped
> doko to test it... so it's self-evident that we would run into some
> problems while it matures. doko has been very responsive
Andreas Barth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Can't we have both? Actually, I think a policy is quite an important
> tool because it shows definitly what one can expect from a package. Of
> course, policy can be changed, but just ignoring policy is only breaking
> expectations. And if you want to ch
Andreas Barth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm always all for improving things. I just don't see it as right
> solution to break stuff and expectations. If one wants to improve
> policy, IMHO the way to go is to send out a mail like "possible
> improvements to policy". (And, BTW, I *definitly* do
On Mon, 19 Jun 2006, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > * Automatic dependency generation in dh_pysupport, removing the
> > need to run dh_python.
>
> You mean, this change breaks compatibility with the previous versions of
> python-support? I strongly recommend to not make such a change.
Jos
Le lundi 19 juin 2006 à 13:28 +0200, Andreas Barth a écrit :
> > Calling /bin/false doesn't entirely break the system.
>
> It seems that you are unaware with the way dpkg works. If a package's
> postinst fails, the package is marked is unconfigured. Any dependent
> packages are also not configured
Hi,
* Marc Dequènes ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [060619 13:17]:
> Andreas Barth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Don't you think it might be a good idea to explain the policy better if
> > it is not understood correctly? (And you might remember that I did such
> > suggestions for the policy already.)
>
* Josselin Mouette ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [060619 13:12]:
> Le lundi 19 juin 2006 à 12:15 +0200, Andreas Barth a écrit :
> > Don't you think it might be a good idea to explain the policy better if
> > it is not understood correctly?
>
> If high-grade developers need explanations, you can't expect the
* Josselin Mouette ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [060619 13:03]:
> Le lundi 19 juin 2006 à 12:09 +0200, Andreas Barth a écrit :
> > Eh, I'm sure you can explain where somebody messed up with dpkg's
> > database? What you can see is "only" that some programs postinst failed
> > to run successfully. You can ge
Coin,
Andreas Barth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Don't you think it might be a good idea to explain the policy better if
> it is not understood correctly? (And you might remember that I did such
> suggestions for the policy already.)
Even the CDBS class was not as easy to use as i wanted, this
Le lundi 19 juin 2006 à 12:15 +0200, Andreas Barth a écrit :
> Don't you think it might be a good idea to explain the policy better if
> it is not understood correctly?
If high-grade developers need explanations, you can't expect the policy
to be widely understood in the long term.
> Also, please
Le lundi 19 juin 2006 à 12:09 +0200, Andreas Barth a écrit :
> * Josselin Mouette ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [060618 11:13]:
> > * Automatic dependency generation in dh_pysupport, removing the
> > need to run dh_python.
>
> You mean, this change breaks compatibility with the previous versio
* Josselin Mouette ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [060618 23:56]:
> Le dimanche 18 juin 2006 à 23:12 +0200, Raphael Hertzog a écrit :
> > This sucks because:
> > - you didn't voice any concern when I worked on dh_python
> > - you have let me NMU debhelper for that dh_python and then you work
> > against it
* Josselin Mouette ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [060618 11:13]:
> * Automatic dependency generation in dh_pysupport, removing the
> need to run dh_python.
You mean, this change breaks compatibility with the previous versions of
python-support? I strongly recommend to not make such a change.
Le dimanche 18 juin 2006 à 23:12 +0200, Raphael Hertzog a écrit :
> This sucks because:
> - you didn't voice any concern when I worked on dh_python
> - you have let me NMU debhelper for that dh_python and then you work
> against it
For that, I have to be sorry. I didn't have enough time to work
On Sun, 18 Jun 2006, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> * Automatic dependency generation in dh_pysupport, removing the
> need to run dh_python.
It's not only removing the need to run dh_python, it requires the
maintainer to remove dh_python because both are not coexisting nicely
any more. Th
20 matches
Mail list logo
