Package: debian-policy
Version: 2.5.0.0
The following typo has been noted in policy.text.gz:
Section 2.1.1., first line:
The Debian Free Software Guidelines (DFSG) as is our definition of
s/as is/is/ ^^ ^^
Bob
--
_
|_) _ |_ Robert D.
Previously Manoj Srivastava wrote:
Why is this report a policy bug? I see no contradicxtion here
at all, I just see two buggy MTA packages. /etc/aliases, as reading
policy tells one, can not, and should not, be a conffile at all.
I reopened it since your reason for closing it was
Hmmm, I admit to being somewhat puzzled. I don't expect comments on
everything I post. However, this was a hot topic in debian-policy a week
ago (as it is 2 or 3 times a year), and I (mis-?) perceived an interest
in cleaning it up. However, there has only been one comment, and no
seconds. Should I
At 02:41 +0100 1998-12-03, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
Previously Manoj Srivastava wrote:
Why is this report a policy bug? I see no contradicxtion here
at all, I just see two buggy MTA packages. /etc/aliases, as reading
policy tells one, can not, and should not, be a conffile at all.
I
Hi,
Wichert == Wichert Akkerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Wichert I reopened it since your reason for closing it was
Wichert false.
Incorrect? Does not false imply intent?
Wichert Feel free to close this, as long as you also file bugs
Wichert against sendmail and exim at the same
Hi,
Steve == Steve Greenland [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Steve Hmmm, I admit to being somewhat puzzled. I don't expect
Steve comments on everything I post. However, this was a hot topic
Steve in debian-policy a week ago (as it is 2 or 3 times a year),
Steve and I (mis-?) perceived an interest
Steve Greenland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
New Version =
If two or more packages use the same configuration file, one of
these packages has to be defined as _owner_ of the configuration
file, i.e., it has to list the
On 2 Dec 1998, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
Why is this report a policy bug? I see no contradicxtion here
at all, I just see two buggy MTA packages. /etc/aliases, as reading
policy tells one, can not, and should not, be a conffile at all.
Even if /etc/aliases stops being a conffile, it
Manoj Srivastava wrote:
Hi,
Wichert == Wichert Akkerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Wichert I reopened it since your reason for closing it was
Wichert false.
Incorrect? Does not false imply intent?
Not in computing science :) I don't know what the terminology is
in the US, but
Raul Miller wrote:
Steve Greenland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
New Version =
If two or more packages use the same configuration file, one of
these packages has to be defined as _owner_ of the configuration
file,
Previously Manoj Srivastava wrote:
Incorrect? Does not false imply intent?
Not that I know of. Then again, I'm not a native English speaker so
I might just not know that.
Wichert.
--
==
This combination of bytes
Previously Joel Klecker wrote:
Huh? exim doesn't claim /etc/aliases as a conffile.
Even better! (I forgot who, but someone said both sendmail and exim
listed aliases as a conffile, which is why I mentioned it).
WIchert.
--
On 03-Dec-98, 06:48 (CST), Richard Braakman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Raul Miller wrote:
Steve Greenland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
New Version =
If two or more packages use the same configuration file, one of
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Manoj Srivastava) wrote:
Charles to check whether you have mistakenly edited an installed script which
Charles wasn't a conffile,
Ok. But this is not an operation that everyone wants (I
personally have never needed to do that -- and I can, since I have a
local
On Fri, 20 Feb 1998, Christian Schwarz wrotee, while discussing the
proposed (and agreed upon) changes to dpkg-genchanges and dinstall to
make the closing of bugs etc. run more smoothly:
Another suggestion was to change the Maintainer: field to Developer:,
Uploader: or whatever, since this
On Thu, 3 Dec 1998, Julian Gilbey wrote:
On Fri, 20 Feb 1998, Christian Schwarz wrotee, while discussing the
proposed (and agreed upon) changes to dpkg-genchanges and dinstall to
make the closing of bugs etc. run more smoothly:
Another suggestion was to change the Maintainer: field to
Charles Briscoe-Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Manoj Srivastava) wrote:
Charles to check whether you have mistakenly edited an installed script
which
Charles wasn't a conffile,
Ok. But this is not an operation that everyone wants (I
personally have never
On Wed, Dec 02, 1998 at 11:23:19PM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
I shall file a bug against sendmail ,which I do have
installed. I shan't file one against exim, since I can't verify that,
and some one has posted saying that exim does not declare
/etc/aliases a conffile.
Indeed it
18 matches
Mail list logo
