Your message dated Sun, 26 Mar 2000 15:17:26 +0200 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line FHS man pages not found by the old man-db has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact me immediately.) Darren Benham (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -------------------------------------- Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 12 Nov 1999 09:15:50 +0000 Received: (qmail 1739 invoked from network); 12 Nov 1999 09:15:49 -0000 Received: from cephyr.cid.net (HELO mail.cid.net) ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) by master.debian.org with SMTP; 12 Nov 1999 09:15:49 -0000 Received: from cephyr.cid.net (lifenet-online.cid.net) [195.35.45.193] (mail) by mail.cid.net (Exim 2.11) with esmtp id 11mCoE-0001Ha-00; Fri, 12 Nov 1999 10:15:54 +0100 Received: from 62.158.230.214 for [EMAIL PROTECTED] by lifenet-online.cid.net (Exim 2.11) with esmtp id 11mCoD-0001HL-00; Fri, 12 Nov 1999 10:15:53 +0100 Received: (from [EMAIL PROTECTED]) by p3E9EE6D6.dip0.t-ipconnect.de (8.9.3+3.2W/8.9.3/Debian/GNU/angepasst) id KAA02196; Fri, 12 Nov 1999 10:15:45 +0100 Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 10:15:30 +0100 From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Andreas_Kr=FCger?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Debian FSS-upgrade process: man pages Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.93i X-Debian-CC: Fabrizio Polacco <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Package: general In short: A reasonably new version of "man-db" should be required on my system automatically, through Debian package dependencies, whenever I install any Debian package that has FSS man pages. The full story: I started with a slink Debian-i386 system. I upgrade packages one at a time to potato, as I see fit. I never leave package dependencies dangling. Other than that, I still have many slink packages around. (My internet connection is charged by the minute.) It happened repeatedly to me that I upgraded to a new package and couldn't read the manual page. FSS strices again. I can always fix that by setting MANPATH to something appropiate with "share" in it. I'm sure there has been a version of the man-programs (package man-db) around for some time that can read FSS-compliant man pages all right. Otherwise, you package maintainers would have long ago addressed the problem. Here is my wish of the Debian system: A reasonably new version of "man-db" should be required on my system automatically, through Debian package dependencies, whenever I install any Debian package that has FSS man pages. I ask Fabrizio, the man-db maintainer, to kindly provide the version number of man-db that should be used in a package dependency for this purpose. (The current version seems to be "2.3.10-69s", so maybe that's the answer.) Or any other input on this he sees fit. Thank you. Maybe someone should construct a Perl script or something that: + Parses through the various .../debian/dists/unstable/Contents*.gz files, + catches any package that has share/man - files, + cross check whether such a package mentions any man-db - version in its dependency requirements (or is man-db itself), + file a bug against any that doesn't, and + remember enough state so that the process can be repeated later without resending that same bug report to packages that have already received it. Maybe there's an even smarter way to handle this in the Debian scheme of things. Maybe this has helped you. I certainly hope so. Keep up the good work! Andreas [EMAIL PROTECTED] ====================================================================== bash-2.02$ dpkg -l man-db Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge | Status=Not/Installed/Config-files/Unpacked/Failed-config/Half-installed |/ Err?=(none)/Hold/Reinst-required/X=both-problems (Status,Err: uppercase=bad) ||/ Name Version Description +++-===============-==============-============================================ ii man-db 2.3.10-68 Display the on-line manual. bash-2.02$ env | grep MAN # No output bash-2.02$ manpath /usr/man:/usr/X11R6/man:/usr/local/man bash-2.02$ apt-cache showpkg man-db Package: man-db Versions: 2.3.10-69s(/var/state/apt/lists/source.rfc822.org_pub_mirror_ftp.debian.org_debian_dists_unstable_main_binary-i386_Packages),2.3.10-68(/var/lib/dpkg/status), Reverse Depends: libc6-dev,man-db manpages-fr,man-db libc6-dev,man-db boot-floppies,man-db 2utf,man-db Dependencies: 2.3.10-69s - groff (0 (null)) libc6 (2 2.1) bsdmainutils (0 (null)) man (0 (null)) man (0 (null)) nlsutils (0 (null)) 2.3.10-68 - groff (0 (null)) libc6 (0 (null)) bsdmainutils (0 (null)) man (0 (null)) man-aeb (0 (null)) man (0 (null)) man-aeb (0 (null)) nlsutils (0 (null)) Provides: 2.3.10-69s - man-browser man 2.3.10-68 - man-browser man Reverse Provides: --------------------------------------- Received: (at 49962-done) by bugs.debian.org; 26 Mar 2000 13:17:32 +0000 Received: (qmail 12635 invoked from network); 26 Mar 2000 13:17:31 -0000 Received: from i511.resi.insa-lyon.fr (HELO k6.resI.insa-lyon.fr) (134.214.164.9) by master.debian.org with SMTP; 26 Mar 2000 13:17:31 -0000 Received: by k6.resI.insa-lyon.fr (Postfix, from userid 1001) id AED224045; Sun, 26 Mar 2000 15:17:26 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2000 15:17:26 +0200 From: Raphael Hertzog <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: FHS man pages not found by the old man-db Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Mailer: Mutt 0.93i Everything has been said, and there's no clean solution. It would be a crude hack to make (all or most of the) packages conflict with an old man-db simply because the man page moved. The Debian dependencies are used to ensure that a program will work, Debian is about software after all. For a complete consistency of your system (including documentation), you should use a precise distribution and not part of slink with part of potato. Cheers, -- Raphaël Hertzog >> 0C4CABF1 >> http://tux.u-strasbg.fr/~raphael/ <pub> CD Debian : http://tux.u-strasbg.fr/~raphael/debian/#cd Formations Linux et logiciels libres : http://www.logidee.com </pub>