Bug#208010: [PROPOSAL] init script LSB 1.3 compliance
On Mon, Sep 08, 2003 at 06:03:56PM +0200, Martin Godisch wrote: On Mon, Sep 08, 2003 at 12:06:02 +0200, Bill Allombert wrote: [reserved exit codes] Does the above make sense in the context of Debian Policy ? You think this can be better? I think it can be removed completly. I disagree. reserved means not recommended for usage here, which should be communicated somehow. Policy recommend not to use them by explicitly listing thus that should be used. That ought to be sufficient. Telling that some of them are reserved by the LSB for LSB packages init files is not particularly relevant to Debian policy. Or else explain what mean `reserved for distribution' in ourt context. This policy does not mandate any 'error message' than I am aware of, so: All messages mandated by policy should go to standard output. You should ensure that any other messages that can eventually be generated is send to standard error. I question this definition. Examples: The bind example has a usage message, which is printed to stderr. The extended status output is not mandated by policy, it should go to stdout. Defining what an error message is may cause more questions than it would answer. OK, then go with All status messages mandated by policy should go to standard output. We can hope people have sufficient sense to use stderr for error messages. Cheers, -- Bill. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Imagine a large red swirl here.
Bug#82310: Oceннee пpедложeнuе - oт 350$ ! онамьиро ян оньйтеты уыаоен ьоно
верлял асыжч К О Н Д И Ц И О Н Е Р Ы ОСЕННЕЕ ПРЕДЛОЖЕНИЕ - от 350$ ! Наша фирма предлагает приобрести и установить к о н д и ц и о н е р ы и вентиляцию ведущих фирм производителей: LG, Samsung, Panasonic, Hitachi, Mitsubishi и др. Все виды вентиляции и строительства. эйииэлде чнл Компания "Универмаг-Инфо" . каиоалм абьа ттвин Тел: (095) 517-99-86, 251-27-79 . иояа длмас Тел.: (095) 517-99-86, 251-27-79 щлб ожэнноу тлсуоарлыт нмеоячсрту ивотыэиоеа ааатпт инонолси нааэч ыгото дчяыьар яонямо евсажол обаробто
Bug#62768: Oсeннеe прeдлoжeние - oт 350$ ! еоеоинл гвянн оаяоо оосрдеч еэсаилп
аеяпр еща еол чсчск К О Н Д И Ц И О Н Е Р Ы ОСЕННЕЕ ПРЕДЛОЖЕНИЕ - от 350$ ! Наша фирма предлагает приобрести и установить к о н д и ц и о н е р ы и вентиляцию ведущих фирм производителей: LG, Samsung, Panasonic, Hitachi, Mitsubishi и др. Все виды вентиляции и строительства. иеи оерозеи Компания "Универмаг-Инфо" . еянт исно ыо Тел: (095) 517-99-86, 251-27-79 . нсоз оьэ тсоа Тел.: (095) 517-99-86, 251-27-79 егмм ама дсиолмыорч ыисалазмаы рьсмылырпе тсы кро нткдандт тсэнуаеэы твноролорь
Move documentation of behavior of ancient dpkg in 6.6 to a footnote (was: /etc/shells management)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Josip Rodin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, Sep 09, 2003 at 09:10:15AM -0400, Daniel Martin wrote: Branden Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'd propose a Policy amendment dropping support for this long-obsolete dpkg behavior, but I reckon I've lost my Policy-amendment-proposing credentials in your eyes. Perhaps we could add a compromise? Say, modifying the paragraph in question to read: If there is no most recently configured version `dpkg' will pass a null argument. (Historical note: [...] Or simply use the fine footnote tag. Ok. Redirecting to debian-policy. - -- - --- /home/ametzler/CVS/debian-policy/policy.sgml Sat Aug 23 22:23:53 2003 +++ policy.sgml Tue Sep 9 17:27:00 2003 @@ -3648,10 +3648,18 @@ p If there is no most recently configured version - - prgndpkg/prgn will pass a null argument; older versions - - of dpkg may pass ttlt;unknowngt;/tt (including the - - angle brackets) in this case. Even older ones do not pass a - - second argument at all, under any circumstances. + prgndpkg/prgn will pass a null argument. + footnote + p +Historical note: Truly ancient (pre-1997) versions of +prgndpkg/prgn passed ttlt;unknowngt;/tt (including +the angle brackets) in this case. Even older ones did not +pass a second argument at all, under any circumstance. Note +that upgrades using such an old dpkg version are unlikely to +work for other reasons, even if this old argument behavior +is handled by your postinst script. + /p + /footnote /p /sect - -- Sent to -policy and -devel, mail-fup2 set for move to -policy (I'd appreciate Cc's for fup's on -policy, I only read that list every other day.) cu andreas -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE/XfQFHTOcZYuNdmMRAuMfAKCMIUGFU1nvakSD4QCCBNnwMsWNIQCfYreI aA58RW/Pn7/3AM9qcaTuSbw= =GO/q -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: Move documentation of behavior of ancient dpkg in 6.6 to a footnote (was: /etc/shells management)
On Tue, Sep 09, 2003 at 05:38:51PM +0200, Andreas Metzler wrote: Ok. Redirecting to debian-policy. Please follow the Policy amendment process. apt-get install debian-policy and then view: file:///usr/share/doc/debian-policy/policy-process.html/index.html -- G. Branden Robinson|Humor is a rubber sword - it allows Debian GNU/Linux |you to make a point without drawing [EMAIL PROTECTED] |blood. http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |-- Mary Hirsch pgpXQKdPnbDMe.pgp Description: PGP signature
Bug#209855: [PROPOSAL] Move documentation of behavior of ancient dpkg in 6.6 to a footnote
Package: debian-policy Version: 3.6.1.0 Severity: wishlist Policy 6.6 describing argumntsx given to postinst configure contains this paragraph: | If there is no most recently configured version dpkg will pass a null | argument; older versions of dpkg may pass unknown (including the | angle brackets) in this case. Even older ones do not pass a second | argument at all, under any circumstances. As dpkg used unknown only up to version 1.2.0 (released May 1996), supporting unknown in maintainerscripts serves no practical purpose anymore, installing a fairly recent (even from potato) package on such an ancient system would probably fail for other reasons (e.g. dependencies). I therefore I propose to clearly mark this as obsolete, as in Don't bother to implement if you have to write a new postinst-script. by moving it into a footnote. There was some initial discussion about this issue on debian-devel, starting with Date: Sun, 7 Sep 2003 10:23:15 -0500 From: Branden Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: /etc/shells management Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] resulting in this suggested wording (courtesy of Daniel Martin): -- --- CVS/debian-policy/policy.sgml Sat Aug 23 22:23:53 2003 +++ policy.sgml Tue Sep 9 17:27:00 2003 @@ -3648,10 +3648,18 @@ p If there is no most recently configured version - prgndpkg/prgn will pass a null argument; older versions - of dpkg may pass ttlt;unknowngt;/tt (including the - angle brackets) in this case. Even older ones do not pass a - second argument at all, under any circumstances. + prgndpkg/prgn will pass a null argument. + footnote + p +Historical note: Truly ancient (pre-1997) versions of +prgndpkg/prgn passed ttlt;unknowngt;/tt (including +the angle brackets) in this case. Even older ones did not +pass a second argument at all, under any circumstance. Note +that upgrades using such an old dpkg version are unlikely to +work for other reasons, even if this old argument behavior +is handled by your postinst script. + /p + /footnote /p /sect -- hth, cu andreas -- System Information Debian Release: 3.0 Architecture: i386 Kernel: Linux downhill 2.4.21acpi #1 Son Jun 15 20:21:21 CEST 2003 i686 Locale: LANG=de_AT, LC_CTYPE=de_AT Versions of packages debian-policy depends on: ii fileutils 4.1-10 GNU file management utilities pgpn9EnzWiiUi.pgp Description: PGP signature
