Re: test -d /usr/man mail submit@bugs
Previously Jim Lynch wrote: In my (potato) /var/cache is... My mistake, /var/cache is still allowed, /var/state isn't. Wichert. -- _ / Nothing is fool-proof to a sufficiently talented fool \ | [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.liacs.nl/~wichert/ | | 1024D/2FA3BC2D 576E 100B 518D 2F16 36B0 2805 3CB8 9250 2FA3 BC2D |
Re: test -d /usr/man mail submit@bugs
On Thu, 28 Dec 2000, Josip Rodin wrote: for package in dpkg apt libc gpg bplay etc ; do sed [...] bug.template | mail ; done You'd better use [EMAIL PROTECTED], else you need a very good asbestos suit ... Too late. }:) ... Grrr... He filed them: - without subject - with severity serious These are at most normal bugs in packages with a Standards-Version 3.0.0 cu, Adrian -- A No uttered from deepest conviction is better and greater than a Yes merely uttered to please, or what is worse, to avoid trouble. -- Mahatma Ghandi
Re: test -d /usr/man mail submit@bugs
Hi. In [EMAIL PROTECTED], on Fri, 29 Dec 2000 01:50:36 +1100, on Re: test -d /usr/man mail [EMAIL PROTECTED], Hamish Moffatt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, Dec 28, 2000 at 09:13:32AM -0500, Chad Miller wrote: I noticed that the FHS2.1 doesn't have /usr/man -- only /usr/share/man. On this box, there are... [...] ...several packages that install stuff in /usr/man . Do these warrant bug reports? Yep, IMHO. We should be FHS compliant by now, there's been plenty of time. The CTTE recommendation, or DPL order, was that the woody has the symlinks from /usr/man/pakcage to /usr/share/man/package, IIRC. Is this changed now ? Can we drop the postinst/prerm requirements to create/remove those symlinks ? -- Taketoshi Sano: [EMAIL PROTECTED],[EMAIL PROTECTED],[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: test -d /usr/man mail submit@bugs
On Fri, Dec 29, 2000 at 08:03:49PM +0900, Taketoshi Sano wrote: The CTTE recommendation, or DPL order, was that the woody has the symlinks from /usr/man/pakcage to /usr/share/man/package, IIRC. Is this changed now ? Can we drop the postinst/prerm requirements to create/remove those symlinks ? /usr/man and /usr/share/man don't have package directories, only man sections (e.g. man[1-8]). I think you are confusing /usr/man and /usr/doc. -- - mdz
Re: test -d /usr/man mail submit@bugs
Arthur Korn [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: for package in dpkg apt libc gpg bplay etc ; do sed [...] bug.template | mail ; done You'd better use [EMAIL PROTECTED], else you need a very good asbestos suit ... Whatever, the above won't work for other reasons (It just tries to chewck you mail a couple of times. I thought of sendmail(1) where you feed the headers with the mail. and thats why I didn't send explicit to maintonly. Every mass bag submit should be maintonly no matter how you do it technically.
Re: test -d /usr/man mail submit@bugs
On Fri, Dec 29, 2000 at 10:46:10AM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote: for package in dpkg apt libc gpg bplay etc ; do sed [...] bug.template | mail ; done You'd better use [EMAIL PROTECTED], else you need a very good asbestos suit ... Too late. }:) ... Grrr... He filed them: - without subject He fixed that. - with severity serious These are at most normal bugs in packages with a Standards-Version 3.0.0 Actually, that can be discussed -- do we want such packages in a stable release? :) -- Digital Electronic Being Intended for Assassination and Nullification
Re: test -d /usr/man mail submit@bugs
On Fri, Dec 29, 2000 at 08:03:49PM +0900, Taketoshi Sano wrote: The CTTE recommendation, or DPL order, was that the woody has the symlinks from /usr/man/pakcage to /usr/share/man/package, IIRC. Is this changed now ? Can we drop the postinst/prerm requirements to create/remove those symlinks ? I think you mean /usr/doc. No symlinks are needed for /usr/man. Regards, Hamish -- Hamish Moffatt VK3SB [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: test -d /usr/man mail submit@bugs
On Fri, Dec 29, 2000 at 01:38:58PM +0100, Peter Makholm wrote: I thought of sendmail(1) where you feed the headers with the mail. and thats why I didn't send explicit to maintonly. Every mass bag submit should be maintonly no matter how you do it technically. What's the difference? I read the web page about submitting bugs and it seems that maintonly just doesn't send them to debian-bugs-dist. How many emails are we talking about? Isn't debian-bugs-dist already full of hundreds of emails not relevant to most people? thanks, Hamish, not a debian-bugs-dist subscriber -- Hamish Moffatt VK3SB [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: test -d /usr/man ( mail submit@bugs; apology; )
On Sat, Dec 30, 2000 at 02:00:29AM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote: How many emails are we talking about? [...] It was about thirty. I'm trully sorry about the whole ordeal. It was stupid of me in several respects. At midday, I just abandoned work until I had a full 8 hours sleep. If I could undo almost every event of yesterday, I would. At any rate, those bug reports are for only the packages I noticed. I'm sure there are _many_ more that install /usr/man/ than I feebly reported. What's wrong with the reports: No version number. The problem may be already fixed -- I checked against woody, and not sid! What's right: The severity prolly should be 'serious'. (The latest policy says to use FHS, and the BTS says policy violations are 'serious'. It's true that the worst that happens is broken alternatives symlinks for man pages, tho. Release critical? Unlikely.) - chad -- Chad Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] URL: http://web.chad.org/ (GPG) Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced. First corollary to Clarke's Third Law (Jargon File, v4.2.0, 'magic')
Re: test -d /usr/man mail submit@bugs
On Sat, Dec 30, 2000 at 02:00:29AM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote: I thought of sendmail(1) where you feed the headers with the mail. and thats why I didn't send explicit to maintonly. Every mass bag submit should be maintonly no matter how you do it technically. What's the difference? I read the web page about submitting bugs and it seems that maintonly just doesn't send them to debian-bugs-dist. Exactly. How many emails are we talking about? Isn't debian-bugs-dist already full of hundreds of emails not relevant to most people? There's a slight difference between various bug report discussions and loads of spam :P -- Digital Electronic Being Intended for Assassination and Nullification
Re: test -d /usr/man mail submit@bugs
Clearly, I was confused. excuse me. Matt Zimmerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: /usr/man and /usr/share/man don't have package directories, only man sections (e.g. man[1-8]). I think you are confusing /usr/man and /usr/doc. Hamish Moffatt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think you mean /usr/doc. No symlinks are needed for /usr/man. OK, I see now. Thanks. :) -- Taketoshi Sano: [EMAIL PROTECTED],[EMAIL PROTECTED],[EMAIL PROTECTED]
test -d /usr/man mail submit@bugs
I noticed that the FHS2.1 doesn't have /usr/man -- only /usr/share/man.
On this box, there are...
$ find /usr/man -exec dpkg -S {} \; |cut -d: -f1 |grep -v , |sort |uniq
dpkg
catdoc
cdcd
cflow
dvidvi
electric-fence
fakeroot
hfsutils
libgdbmg1-dev
liblockfile1
libmime-base64-perl
lsof-2.2
m4
macutils
mailx
manpages
mime-support
mingetty
minicom
mpg123
pwgen
sc
sgml-base
sysklogd
untex
update
vim-perl
wenglish
wfrench
wvdial
...several packages that install stuff in /usr/man . Do these warrant bug
reports?
- chad
--
Chad Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] URL: http://web.chad.org/ (GPG)
Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced.
First corollary to Clarke's Third Law (Jargon File, v4.2.0, 'magic')
Re: test -d /usr/man mail submit@bugs
On Thu, Dec 28, 2000 at 09:13:32AM -0500, Chad Miller wrote: I noticed that the FHS2.1 doesn't have /usr/man -- only /usr/share/man. On this box, there are... [...] ...several packages that install stuff in /usr/man . Do these warrant bug reports? Yep, IMHO. We should be FHS compliant by now, there's been plenty of time. Hamish -- Hamish Moffatt VK3SB [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: test -d /usr/man mail submit@bugs
Previously Chad Miller wrote: I noticed that the FHS2.1 doesn't have /usr/man -- only /usr/share/man. On this box, there are... There are more problems, like packages usage /var/cache which shouldn't exist anymore. Wichert. -- / Generally uninteresting signature - ignore at your convenience \ | [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.liacs.nl/~wichert/ | | 1024D/2FA3BC2D 576E 100B 518D 2F16 36B0 2805 3CB8 9250 2FA3 BC2D |
Re: test -d /usr/man mail submit@bugs
Previously Chad Miller wrote: dpkg Looking at the changelog the dpkg manpage were moved to /usr/share/man in version 1.4.1.5, released Tue, 13 Jul 1999. I just checked and I have dpkg manpage in /usr/share/man on my system. Wichert. -- / Generally uninteresting signature - ignore at your convenience \ | [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.liacs.nl/~wichert/ | | 1024D/2FA3BC2D 576E 100B 518D 2F16 36B0 2805 3CB8 9250 2FA3 BC2D |
Re: test -d /usr/man mail submit@bugs
On Thu, Dec 28, 2000 at 04:17:20PM +0100, Wichert Akkerman wrote: Previously Chad Miller wrote: dpkg Looking at the changelog the dpkg manpage were moved to /usr/share/man in version 1.4.1.5, released Tue, 13 Jul 1999. I just checked and I have dpkg manpage in /usr/share/man on my system. Ha! That's a bug/unexpected-feature of dpkg. Its errors look a lot like the output of -S: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ ls -l /usr/man/man1/editor.1.gz lrwxrwxrwx1 root root 29 Jun 29 2000 /usr/man/man1/editor.1.gz - /etc/alternatives/editor.1.gz (bad symlink) [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ dpkg -S /usr/man/man1/editor.1.gz dpkg: /usr/man/man1/editor.1.gz not found. [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ dpkg -S /badfilename dpkg: /badfilename not found. dpkg is fine. - chad -- Chad Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] URL: http://web.chad.org/ (GPG) Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced. First corollary to Clarke's Third Law (Jargon File, v4.2.0, 'magic')
Re: test -d /usr/man mail submit@bugs
I don't suppose there's a easy way to submit a batch of bug reports, eh? - chad -- Chad Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] URL: http://web.chad.org/ (GPG) Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced. First corollary to Clarke's Third Law (Jargon File, v4.2.0, 'magic')
Re: test -d /usr/man mail submit@bugs
Chad Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I don't suppose there's a easy way to submit a batch of bug reports, eh? Just do a for package in dpkg apt libc gpg bplay etc ; do sed [...] bug.template | mail ; done where sed do the right thing. That is an easy way, right? (say yes!)
Re: test -d /usr/man mail submit@bugs
Chad Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I don't suppose there's a easy way to submit a batch of bug reports, eh? On Thu, Dec 28, 2000 at 05:17:40PM +0100, Peter Makholm wrote: Just do a for package in dpkg apt libc gpg bplay etc ; do sed [...] bug.template | mail ; done where sed do the right thing. That is an easy way, right? (say yes!) It's easy enough, but I link the word 'batch' and the BTS mentally for some reason -- one not justifiable by searching the web site. I think I've read ``here's how, but your almost certainly shouldn't be doing it because'' Oh well. - chad -- Chad Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] URL: http://web.chad.org/ (GPG) Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced. First corollary to Clarke's Third Law (Jargon File, v4.2.0, 'magic')
Re: test -d /usr/man mail submit@bugs
hi Peter Makholm schrieb: for package in dpkg apt libc gpg bplay etc ; do sed [...] bug.template | mail ; done You'd better use [EMAIL PROTECTED], else you need a very good asbestos suit ... ciao, 2ri
Re: test -d /usr/man mail submit@bugs
On Thu, Dec 28, 2000 at 09:56:37PM +0100, Arthur Korn wrote: for package in dpkg apt libc gpg bplay etc ; do sed [...] bug.template | mail ; done You'd better use [EMAIL PROTECTED], else you need a very good asbestos suit ... Too late. }:) BTW your Mail-Followup-To is broken. -- Digital Electronic Being Intended for Assassination and Nullification
Re: test -d /usr/man mail submit@bugs
On Thu, Dec 28, 2000 at 02:08:08PM +, Chad Miller wrote:
I noticed that the FHS2.1 doesn't have /usr/man -- only /usr/share/man.
On this box, there are...
$ find /usr/man -exec dpkg -S {} \; |cut -d: -f1 |grep -v , |sort |uniq
[...]
mpg123
Not.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]$ dpkg -l mpg123; dlocate -L mpg123|grep man
Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge/Hold
| Status=Not/Installed/Config-files/Unpacked/Failed-config/Half-installed
|/ Err?=(none)/Hold/Reinst-required/X=both-problems (Status,Err: uppercase=bad)
||/ NameVersion Description
+++-===-===-==
ii mpg123 0.59r-6 MPEG layer 1/2/3 audio player
/usr/share/man
/usr/share/man/man1
/usr/share/man/man1/mpg123-oss.1.gz
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]$
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED],havoc,gaeshido}.fi,{debian,wanderer}.org,stonesoft.com}
Perl poetry: for ($tv) { s/blood/caffeine/ while /blood/ }
Re: test -d /usr/man mail submit@bugs
On Thu, Dec 28, 2000 at 09:13:32AM -0500, Chad Miller wrote:
$ find /usr/man -exec dpkg -S {} \; |cut -d: -f1 |grep -v , |sort |uniq
Just parse a Contents-ARCH.gz file to find all packages that still have
/usr/man.
Roland
--
Roland Bauerschmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: test -d /usr/man mail submit@bugs
Hi, In my (potato) /var/cache is... apache/ apt/ bind/ cracklib/ man/ man2html/ xfstt/ -Jim
