Loic Minier [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hi,
On Tue, Oct 18, 2005, Nico Golde wrote:
:) Ok now we are at the beginning. I removed the rm -f
statement and also the output (which was the initial reason
for this bts together with the deletion).
etc/fetchmailrc will not be deleted in
Hi,
On mer, oct 19, 2005, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
But then dpkg would pester the user about the file every time the
template in the deb changes, and at random times even without. Which I
absolutely hate.
Only when upgrading, only when the template changes. You seem to
describe
reopen 288063
thanks
Hi,
On Tue, Oct 04, 2005, Jeremy S Bygott wrote:
But are we happy about this? There is at least one reason why
fetchmail ( = 6.2.5-12sarge1 ) does not purge this file. The message
in the postrm,
Not removing /etc/fetchmailrc ...
is uninformative but does
Hallo Loic,
* Loic Minier [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005-10-18 14:34]:
reopen 288063
thanks
Hi,
On Tue, Oct 04, 2005, Jeremy S Bygott wrote:
But are we happy about this? There is at least one reason why
fetchmail ( = 6.2.5-12sarge1 ) does not purge this file. The message
in the
On Tue, Oct 18, 2005, Nico Golde wrote:
Ok just to clarifiy you mean keeping the /etc/fetchmailrc in
the case of a purge too?
Thats not what purge ist for.
Purge concern files handled by a package. For example, things created
by the package (configuration file, logs, pid file, run dir) or
tags 288063 + pending
Hi,
* Loic Minier [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005-10-18 17:04]:
On Tue, Oct 18, 2005, Nico Golde wrote:
Ok just to clarifiy you mean keeping the /etc/fetchmailrc in
the case of a purge too?
Thats not what purge ist for.
Purge concern files handled by a package. For
Hi,
On Tue, Oct 18, 2005, Nico Golde wrote:
:) Ok now we are at the beginning. I removed the rm -f
statement and also the output (which was the initial reason
for this bts together with the deletion).
etc/fetchmailrc will not be deleted in the future.
Please consider shipping a
Hi,
* Jeremy S Bygott [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005-10-05 14:29]:
Hi, I see that Nico agreed with the bug report and wrote
you are right, it should be deleted. it will be fixed with
the next upload.
But are we happy about this? There is at least one reason why
fetchmail ( =
-- Start of PGP signed section.
Hi,
* Jeremy S Bygott [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005-10-05 14:29]:
Hi, I see that Nico agreed with the bug report and wrote
you are right, it should be deleted. it will be fixed with
the next upload.
But are we happy about this? There is at least
The Debian Policy Manual, version 3.6.1.1, section 3.10.1 says:
Package maintainer scripts may prompt the user if
necessary. Prompting should be done by communicating through a
program, such as debconf, which conforms to the Debian
Configuration management
Hi, I see that Nico agreed with the bug report and wrote
hi,
you are right, it should be deleted. it will be fixed with
the next upload.
But are we happy about this? There is at least one reason why
fetchmail ( = 6.2.5-12sarge1 ) does not purge this file. The message
in
11 matches
Mail list logo
