Brian M. Carlson writes ("Re: Mass bug filing: failure to use invoke-rc.d when
required"):
> But seriously, if violating Debian Policy has no consequences, then it
> probably won't be followed. As it stands now, Policy is useless because
> the worst that can happen is an
On 15 May 2006, Bastian Blank told this:
> On Mon, May 15, 2006 at 06:10:52AM +0300, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
>> I propose to file bugs against the packages before the end of this
>> week, and, after a couple of weeks, for packages that haven't been
>> fixed already, start making NMUs (via DELAYED/7,
On Wed, May 17, 2006 at 12:37:56PM +, Brian M. Carlson wrote:
> Then when are we removing the debian-policy package from the archive?
> But seriously, if violating Debian Policy has no consequences, then it
> probably won't be followed. As it stands now, Policy is useless because
> the worst t
On Wed, 2006-05-17 at 09:19 +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> On Wednesday, May 17, 2006 7:59 AM, Lionel Elie Mamane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > On Wed, May 17, 2006 at 12:53:39AM +0300, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
> >> ti, 2006-05-16 kello 09:53 +0200, Bas Zoetekouw kirjoitti:
> [...]
> >>> AFAIK, vi
On Wednesday, May 17, 2006 7:59 AM, Lionel Elie Mamane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Wed, May 17, 2006 at 12:53:39AM +0300, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
>> ti, 2006-05-16 kello 09:53 +0200, Bas Zoetekouw kirjoitti:
[...]
>>> AFAIK, vilolating policy always waarent a serious bug:
[...]
>> This is not wha
On Wed, May 17, 2006 at 12:53:39AM +0300, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
> ti, 2006-05-16 kello 09:53 +0200, Bas Zoetekouw kirjoitti:
>> Lars wrote:
The usage is mendantory (aka a must clause) but the bugs are not
RC? This does not fit.
>>> It violates policy, but not in a way enumerated on
>>>
ti, 2006-05-16 kello 09:53 +0200, Bas Zoetekouw kirjoitti:
> Hi Lars!
>
> You wrote:
>
> > > The usage is mendantory (aka a must clause) but the bugs are not RC?
> > > This does not fit.
> >
> > It violates policy, but not in a way enumerated on
> > http://release.debian.org/etch_rc_policy.txt,
Hi Lars!
You wrote:
> > The usage is mendantory (aka a must clause) but the bugs are not RC?
> > This does not fit.
>
> It violates policy, but not in a way enumerated on
> http://release.debian.org/etch_rc_policy.txt, which means that it isn't
> release critical, unless I've misunderstood somet
ma, 2006-05-15 kello 08:55 +0200, Bastian Blank kirjoitti:
> On Mon, May 15, 2006 at 06:10:52AM +0300, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
> > I propose to file bugs against the packages before the end of this week,
> > and, after a couple of weeks, for packages that haven't been fixed
> > already, start making
On Mon, May 15, 2006 at 06:10:52AM +0300, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
> The latest version of the Debian Policy Manual has made the use of
> invoke-rc.d mandatory, if that command exists. Directly calling an
(...)
> Javier Fernandez-Sanguino Pen~a <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>nessus-core
Fixed pack
On Mon, May 15, 2006 at 06:10:52AM +0300, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
> I propose to file bugs against the packages before the end of this week,
> and, after a couple of weeks, for packages that haven't been fixed
> already, start making NMUs (via DELAYED/7, since they're not RC) to get
> the packages fi
The latest version of the Debian Policy Manual has made the use of
invoke-rc.d mandatory, if that command exists. Directly calling an
/etc/init.d script in maintainer scripts is no longer allowed, unless
invoke-rc.d doesn't exist on the system. See section 9.3.3.2.[1]
[1]
http://www.us.debian.
12 matches
Mail list logo
