Hi Simon,
On Sunday 24 January 2010, Simon Horman wrote:
On Sat, Jan 23, 2010 at 07:42:47PM +0100, Jan Wagner wrote:
what about the suggested change? Is anything blocking this fix? :)
The suggested change seems entirely reasonable to me.
I'm reluctant to upload because of it. But I can
if
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
tag 552690 +pending
Bug #552690 [heartbeat] mknod-in-maintainer-script postinst:39
Added tag(s) pending.
thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian
I'm reluctant to upload because of it. But I can
if people feel strongly about it.
The practical impact here is that until this bug is fixed, due to the
archive lintian checks currently in place, this package can't be uploaded -
including for security NMUs.
So I would suggest that you upload,
On Sun, Jan 24, 2010 at 09:02:50PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
I'm reluctant to upload because of it. But I can
if people feel strongly about it.
The practical impact here is that until this bug is fixed, due to the
archive lintian checks currently in place, this package can't be uploaded
Hi there,
On Thursday 29 October 2009, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
You may use mkfifo instead of mknod, since there is no policy
prohibition on mkfifo (and it can't be used to make special
files). Perhaps we can add a footnote to policy mentioning mkfifo where
the mknod prohibition is
On Sat, Jan 23, 2010 at 07:42:47PM +0100, Jan Wagner wrote:
Hi there,
On Thursday 29 October 2009, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
You may use mkfifo instead of mknod, since there is no policy
prohibition on mkfifo (and it can't be used to make special
files). Perhaps we can add a
Manoj Srivastava sriva...@debian.org writes:
On Thu, Oct 29 2009, Simon Horman wrote:
Could you suggest a policy-compliant method of creating fifos for the
package? At the time that I added mknod to the maintainer script the
consensus that this was the best option available.
You may
Seconded.
On Thu, 2009-11-12 at 13:29 -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
Manoj Srivastava sriva...@debian.org writes:
On Thu, Oct 29 2009, Simon Horman wrote:
Could you suggest a policy-compliant method of creating fifos for the
package? At the time that I added mknod to the maintainer script
On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 04:24:24PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
Package: heartbeat
Version: 2.1.4-7
Severity: serious
User: lintian-ma...@debian.org
Usertags: mknod-in-maintainer-script
Justification: Maintainer scripts must not create device files directly.
Refer to Debian Policy
Hi,
On Thu, Oct 29 2009, Simon Horman wrote:
Could you suggest a policy-compliant method of creating fifos for the
package? At the time that I added mknod to the maintainer script
the consensus that this was the best option available.
You may use mkfifo instead of mknod, since there
Package: heartbeat
Version: 2.1.4-7
Severity: serious
User: lintian-ma...@debian.org
Usertags: mknod-in-maintainer-script
Justification: Maintainer scripts must not create device files directly.
Refer to Debian Policy Manual section 10.6 (Device files) for details.
manoj
-- System
11 matches
Mail list logo
