Re: Packages should not Conflict on the basis of duplicate functionality

1999-10-01 Thread John Goerzen
The Doctor What <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I do not believe that any network daemon should automatically start > grabbing resources without asking. By installing a package, I only > consent to commiting disk space and the resoureses needed to get it > actually on the disk. Anything beyond tha

Re: /usr/doc symlink in new packages

1999-10-01 Thread Anthony Towns
On Fri, Oct 01, 1999 at 02:03:46PM +0200, Stefan Gybas wrote: (on the topic of "new packages that will always use /usr/share/doc") > AFAICS dpkg has 2 problems with this issue: > 1. dpkg can't replace a directory with a symlink > 2. dpkg does not know about multiple paths to the same file (i.e. i

Re: /usr/doc symlink in new packages

1999-10-01 Thread Stefan Gybas
Wichert Akkerman wrote: > No. For the full explanation read the post with the results from the > technical committee. I have read this document (http://www.debian.org/Lists-Archives/ debian-ctte-9908/msg00038.html) at least twice before I posted the original question but could not find a reason w

Re: Packages should not Conflict on the basis of duplicate functionality

1999-10-01 Thread The Doctor What
On Sat, Sep 25, 1999 at 01:02:44AM -0700, Joey Hess wrote: > The Doctor What wrote: > > Why shouldn't *all* daemon packages ask these questions, and whether to even > > run *upon install*? > > Because we need to decrease the number of questions asked at install time, > not increase it. According

Bug#42634: marked as done ([PROPOSAL] Automatic migration to /usr/share/doc)

1999-10-01 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Your message dated Fri, 01 Oct 1999 06:49:18 + with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Close this has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reope