Le 30 nov. 09 à 00:13, Manoj Srivastava a écrit :
On Thu, Nov 26 2009, Matthew Palmer wrote:
On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 01:38:32PM +0100, Lucas B. Cohen wrote:
Is it considered acceptable for a package to blindly delete, then
recreate its entire directory under /usr/share/doc upon
Hi, Manoj:
On Sunday 29 November 2009 04:53:05 Manoj Srivastava wrote:
On Sat, Nov 28 2009, Jesús M. Navarro wrote:
Hi, Ben:
On Saturday 28 November 2009 08:59:13 Ben Finney wrote:
Jesús M. Navarro jesus.nava...@undominio.net writes:
Not personal but sysadmin related. When I want to
On Sun, Nov 29 2009, Jesús M. Navarro wrote:
Hi, Manoj:
On Sunday 29 November 2009 04:53:05 Manoj Srivastava wrote:
On Sat, Nov 28 2009, Jesús M. Navarro wrote:
Strongly questionable: notes about package emacs, installed via package
manager might go under /usr/share/doc/emacs, why not.
Hi again, Manoj:
On Sunday 29 November 2009 21:00:14 Manoj Srivastava wrote:
[...]
Well, then don't put the notes there. Select whatever place is
logical to you and your fellow users.
Like... /usr/share/doc/emacs? (again on square one).
But Debian also does not tell you
On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 01:38:32PM +0100, Lucas B. Cohen wrote:
Is it considered acceptable for a package to blindly delete, then
recreate its entire directory under /usr/share/doc upon installation or
upgrade ?
I would consider it extremely unacceptable. Your package can fiddle with files
it
On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 03:41:39PM +0100, Lucas B. Cohen wrote:
Roger Leigh wrote:
Users don't have write access to anything under /usr in general
(and /usr/share/doc in particular). If they did place files there,
they must have done it after gaining root privs. I.e. they took
On Thu, Nov 26 2009, Matthew Palmer wrote:
On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 01:38:32PM +0100, Lucas B. Cohen wrote:
Is it considered acceptable for a package to blindly delete, then
recreate its entire directory under /usr/share/doc upon installation or
upgrade ?
I would consider it extremely
On Sun, Nov 29 2009, Jesús M. Navarro wrote:
here are a lot of things upstream can do that's undone at packaging in
order to comply with Debian policy. If it *were* (a big if, of
course) the policy that local-* files are sacred then something should
be done. On the other hand that finding a
On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 03:13:35AM +1100, Matthew Palmer wrote:
On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 01:38:32PM +0100, Lucas B. Cohen wrote:
Is it considered acceptable for a package to blindly delete, then
recreate its entire directory under /usr/share/doc upon installation or
upgrade ?
I would
On Sun, Nov 29, 2009 at 05:13:51PM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
On Thu, Nov 26 2009, Matthew Palmer wrote:
On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 01:38:32PM +0100, Lucas B. Cohen wrote:
Is it considered acceptable for a package to blindly delete, then
recreate its entire directory under /usr/share/doc
Hi, Ben:
On Saturday 28 November 2009 08:59:13 Ben Finney wrote:
Jesús M. Navarro jesus.nava...@undominio.net writes:
Not personal but sysadmin related. When I want to find information
about a given package I go to /usr/share/doc/pkg so I find
reasonable that the local sysadmin would add
On Sat, Nov 28 2009, Jesús M. Navarro wrote:
Hi, Ben:
On Saturday 28 November 2009 08:59:13 Ben Finney wrote:
Jesús M. Navarro jesus.nava...@undominio.net writes:
Not personal but sysadmin related. When I want to find information
about a given package I go to /usr/share/doc/pkg so I find
Hi all:
On Thursday 26 November 2009 15:00:18 Lucas B. Cohen wrote:
Thibaut Paumard wrote:
Le 26 nov. 09 à 13:38, Lucas B. Cohen a écrit :
Esteemed Debian mentors,
Is it considered acceptable for a package to blindly delete, then
recreate its entire directory under /usr/share/doc upon
Jesús M. Navarro jesus.nava...@undominio.net writes:
Not personal but sysadmin related. When I want to find information
about a given package I go to /usr/share/doc/pkg so I find
reasonable that the local sysadmin would add notes about the package
right there if needed.
No, I don't think
Esteemed Debian mentors,
Is it considered acceptable for a package to blindly delete, then
recreate its entire directory under /usr/share/doc upon installation or
upgrade ?
Although I probably will do a conditional backup of such a hypothtical
folder in {pre,post}inst anyhow (polite feels like
On Qui, 26 Nov 2009, Lucas B. Cohen wrote:
Esteemed Debian mentors,
Is it considered acceptable for a package to blindly delete, then
recreate its entire directory under /usr/share/doc upon installation or
upgrade ?
Although I probably will do a conditional backup of such a hypothtical
folder
Eduardo M KALINOWSKI wrote:
On Qui, 26 Nov 2009, Lucas B. Cohen wrote:
Is it considered acceptable for a package to blindly delete, then
recreate its entire directory under /usr/share/doc upon installation or
upgrade ?
Why exactly do you want to do that? What do you want to achieve?
I'm
Le 26 nov. 09 à 13:38, Lucas B. Cohen a écrit :
Esteemed Debian mentors,
Is it considered acceptable for a package to blindly delete, then
recreate its entire directory under /usr/share/doc upon installation
or
upgrade ?
[...]
In worse-case scenarios, these could be illogically interpreted
Thibaut Paumard wrote:
Le 26 nov. 09 à 13:38, Lucas B. Cohen a écrit :
Esteemed Debian mentors,
Is it considered acceptable for a package to blindly delete, then
recreate its entire directory under /usr/share/doc upon installation or
upgrade ?
[...]
In worse-case scenarios, these could
Hi!
* Lucas B. Cohen mli...@free.fr [091126 14:40]:
Why exactly do you want to do that? What do you want to achieve?
I'm triaging bugs opened against the Bacula package, and a patch has
been submitted to a .preinst file that can swipe /usr/share/doc/bacula
during upgrades.
Could you
Le 26 nov. 09 à 14:40, Lucas B. Cohen a écrit :
Eduardo M KALINOWSKI wrote:
On Qui, 26 Nov 2009, Lucas B. Cohen wrote:
Is it considered acceptable for a package to blindly delete, then
recreate its entire directory under /usr/share/doc upon
installation or
upgrade ?
Why exactly do
On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 03:00:18PM +0100, Lucas B. Cohen wrote:
Of course I understand the standard files under doc/ (and even the whole
directory) are under dpkg's control (obviously the, changelog copyright,
etc.). But perhaps user's don't.
Users don't have write access to anything under
Thibaut Paumard wrote:
I suppose you mean:
bacula: usr-share-doc-symlink-without-dependency
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=554197
The idea is to delete the directory in order to replace it by a symlink.
That's the one, thank you.
In my opinion, it is OK to do that
Roger Leigh wrote:
Users don't have write access to anything under /usr in general
(and /usr/share/doc in particular). If they did place files there,
they must have done it after gaining root privs. I.e. they took
deliberate steps to do something they should not under normal
circumstances
24 matches
Mail list logo
