Re: Bug#197835: [PROPOSAL]: integrated environments are allowed
Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I haven't thought very much about Colin Walters' [1] points about editors as embeddable components yet, [1] Damn, this is confusing. Maybe the two of us should avoid getting involved in the same discussions in the future. :-) On the contrary, when you both participate I'm reminded that you are two distinct people. :-) It would help if I met you both in person... Peter
Bug#197100: cdbs and Build-Depends-Indep
Date: 16 Jun 2003 19:40:34 -0400 From: Colin Walters [EMAIL PROTECTED] Well, probably the main reason we haven't hit this before is that most people don't bother to do a proper arch/indep split in their packages, and just stuff everything into Build-Depends. And that's what I'm going to do, for now. It looks like this will take a while to resolve, and I don't want an RC bug open while waiting for that to happen.
Re: Bug#197835: [PROPOSAL]: integrated environments are allowed
On Thu, Jun 19, 2003 at 09:19:50AM -0400, Peter S Galbraith wrote: Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I haven't thought very much about Colin Walters' [1] points about editors as embeddable components yet, [1] Damn, this is confusing. Maybe the two of us should avoid getting involved in the same discussions in the future. :-) On the contrary, when you both participate I'm reminded that you are two distinct people. :-) It would help if I met you both in person... http://necrotic.deadbeast.net/~branden/toronto/debconf/10.html Colin Walters is on the left. Colin Watson is on the right. -- G. Branden Robinson| Life is what happens to you while Debian GNU/Linux | you're busy making other plans. [EMAIL PROTECTED] | -- John Lennon http://people.debian.org/~branden/ | pgpzVh1sI836X.pgp Description: PGP signature
Bug#198120: debian-policy: 10.3 init scripts secret options
Package: debian-policy Version: 3.5.8.0 Severity: wishlist in the policy manual 10.3.2 Writing the scripts These scripts should be named /etc/init.d/package, and they should accept one argument, saying what to do: start start the service, The start, stop, restart, and force-reload options should be supported by all scripts in /etc/init.d, the reload option is optional. OK, but you don't say if the script can have 'secret other arguments' than start... We see or to specify some special command line options when starting a service, so the above accept one argument appears to be flexible. we see: 'The start, stop, restart, and force-reload options should be supported by all scripts in /etc/init.d, the reload option is optional.' But be explicit about choices beyond these 5 or 4. Also should accept one argument, saying what to do: should be explicit about if it is at least one, or only one. -- System Information: Debian Release: testing/unstable Architecture: i386 Kernel: Linux debian 2.4.20-k7 #1 Tue Jan 14 00:29:06 EST 2003 i686 Locale: LANG=zh_TW.Big5, LC_CTYPE=zh_TW.Big5 -- no debconf information
Bug#198120: debian-policy: 10.3 init scripts secret options
On Thu, Jun 19, 2003 at 11:23:36PM +0200, Martin Godisch wrote: On Fri, Jun 20, 2003 at 03:13:37 +0800, Dan Jacobson wrote: Also should accept one argument, saying what to do: should be explicit about if it is at least one, or only one. Sorry, I don't understand. What do you want? Overspecification of irrelevent details, as near as I can make out. Dan, policy's job is not to tell you what's allowed. Policy's job is to tell you what's required, and what's forbidden, and that's pretty much it. If you want to add 700 optional arguments to your init scripts, go for it. As long as it does the proper thing when fed the standard required arguments, nobody will care. And because nobody cares...it's not a policy issue. cheers -- Chris Waters | Pneumonoultra-osis is too long [EMAIL PROTECTED] | microscopicsilico-to fit into a single or [EMAIL PROTECTED] | volcaniconi- standalone haiku
