Bug#593611: Acknowledgement (debian-policy: Clarify whose signature should go in debian/changelog (4.4))

On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 04:05:20PM -0700, Don Armstrong wrote: > On Thu, 19 Aug 2010, Felipe Sateler wrote: > > Policy 4.4 currently says: > > > > > The maintainer name and email address used in the changelog should be > > > the details of the person uploading this version. They are not > > > nece

Bug#594274: debian-policy: Don't track generated README documents in VCS

On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 03:50:02PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > Ben Finney writes: > > Russ Allbery writes: > > >> If that's no longer a concern, I can remove the generated files and > >> build them from debian/rules by default. > > > (And add ‘emacs’ to ‘Build-Depends-Indep’, I assume.) > > >

Bug#504880: Disambiguate "installed" for packages

On Sun, Aug 15, 2010 at 02:57:18PM -0500, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > Russ Allbery wrote: > > > How about this? > > > > > > The Depends field should also be used if the > > postinst or prerm scripts > > require the depended-on package to be unpacked or

Bug#592317: developers-reference: Document the communication channels and what's expected from DD in terms of communication/marketing

On Mon, Aug 09, 2010 at 09:55:57AM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > Package: developers-reference > Version: 3.4.3 > Severity: wishlist > > In the publicity Bof at debconf, we agreed that we need to better > communicate to DD the various communication channels that are available > and the way that

Bug#587279: debian-policy: section 2.2.1 needs some tweaking

On Sat, Jul 24, 2010 at 09:43:34AM +0200, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 11:49:18AM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote: > > > Where does policy define the concept of 'non-default alternative' for > > dependencies ? > > This is implied by 7.5: > &

Bug#504880: Disambiguate "installed" for packages

On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 03:39:30PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > Jonathan Nieder writes: > > Russ Allbery wrote: > > >> I think we should hopefully be close to a final wording now. > > > Indeed! All I have left are copy-edits (patch below). > > Thanks! Applied to my copy. > > >> @@ -5048,7 +5

Bug#587279: debian-policy: section 2.2.1 needs some tweaking

On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 09:26:38AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > diff --git a/policy.sgml b/policy.sgml > index 0b3c1a1..06c1fdc 100644 > --- a/policy.sgml > +++ b/policy.sgml > @@ -476,9 +476,12 @@ > > must not require a package outside of main > for com

Bug#587279: debian-policy: section 2.2.1 needs some tweaking

On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 12:45:49AM -0500, Raphael Geissert wrote: > On Monday 19 July 2010 11:26:38 Russ Allbery wrote: > > diff --git a/policy.sgml b/policy.sgml > > index 0b3c1a1..06c1fdc 100644 > > --- a/policy.sgml > > +++ b/policy.sgml > > @@ -476,9 +476,12 @@ > > > >

Re: Policy 3.9.1 planning

On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 10:45:29AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > We've accumulated quite a list of changes for the next release, and I'd > like to get out another Debian Policy release before Debconf. Since I'm > going to be travelling weekend after next (to Debconf), that means I'm > currently ten

Bug#587279: debian-policy: section 2.2.1 needs some tweaking

On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 10:31:57AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > Raphael Geissert writes: > > > I see a couple of issues with the current section 2.2.1 "The main > > archive area:" > > > a) It does not list neither Pre-Depends nor Build-depends-indep. > > b) It does not take into consideration OR

Re: some thoughts about package refences in the info files

On Fri, Jul 02, 2010 at 09:58:17AM +0200, Tepperis-von der Ohe, Michael wrote: > hi, > > thanks for this hint. but how I recognize a package as being 'virtual'? > the Packages files offers this information only sometimes in the > description area. > > Does an extra list of virtual packages exist

Re: some thoughts about package refences in the info files

On Thu, Jul 01, 2010 at 09:18:51AM +0200, Tepperis-von der Ohe, Michael wrote: > hi folks, > > Package: muttprint > ... > Enhances: mail-reader, news-reader > > a package 'news-reader' does not exist News-reader is a virtual package, which is provided by a number of packages, for example tin pr

Re: some thoughts about package refences in the info files

On Thu, Jul 01, 2010 at 09:18:51AM +0200, Tepperis-von der Ohe, Michael wrote: > examples: > > Package: abuse > ... > Conflicts: abuse-sdl (<< 0.6.1-2) > > a package 'abuse-sdl' does not exist I do not have time to go in detail but it usual for Conflicts to reference packages names that existed

Re: Accepted sdm 0.4.1-2 (source all)

On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 02:40:37PM +0100, Julien Cristau wrote: > On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 12:57:45 +, Vagrant Cascadian wrote: > > > sdm (0.4.1-2) unstable; urgency=low > > . > [...] > >* No longer include dash as a dependency; it is included in essential. > >* Add lintian overrides

Bug#569174: [PATCH] Correction of RFC number for date format -- bug #569174.

On Tue, Jun 01, 2010 at 10:47:18AM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote: > RFC 822 dates use only two digits for the years, but Debian changelogs > described by this paragraph (§4.4 in Policy 3.8.4) use four digits. This patch > replaces the RFC 822 by its latest evolution, RFC 5322, that specifies a date >

Bug#582495: debian-policy: extend UID range of user accounts

On Tue, Jun 01, 2010 at 01:03:06PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > Bill Allombert writes: > > > This make four seconds so far, so the proposal is accepted. > > > Proposed by Santiago Vila > > Seconded: Russ Allbery > > Seconded: Luk Claes &

Bug#582495: debian-policy: extend UID range of user accounts

On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 01:27:38PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 08:26:46PM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > > On Fri, 21 May 2010, Santiago Vila wrote: > > > Known affected packages: adduser, base-files > > > Fix: Trivial: s/2/5/ > > > > I'm looking for seconds for

Bug#566220: [PATCH] Clarify “copyright and distribution license”

On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 10:20:36AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > Bill Allombert writes: > > On Sun, Apr 25, 2010 at 06:19:26PM -0500, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > > >> I see seconds by > >> > >> Steve Langasek (message #137) > >> Thijs Kinkhorst

Re: What defines the format of the NEWS.Debian file?

On Sun, May 23, 2010 at 08:23:08PM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote: > Dear all, > > I am working on a package that triggers the Lintian tag > ‘debian-news-entry-without-blank-line’. This prompted me to look > for a formal description of the format of NEWS.Debian. The problem > is: > > - It is not do

Bug#582495: debian-policy: extend UID range of user accounts

merge 161912 582495 quit On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 12:15:04PM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote: > Hmm, I see this is already reported as Bug#161912. > > However, this report includes a patch :-) > > Feel free to merge them anyway. Done. Cheers, -- Bill. Imagine a large red swirl here. -- To UNS

Bug#581352: debian-policy: libtool la files are still encouraged in the policy (contrary to the release goal)

On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 01:22:51PM +0200, Vincent Danjean wrote: > Package: debian-policy > Version: 3.8.4.0 > Severity: normal > > Hi, > > At this end of "10.2 Libraries", there are several lines about including la > files in binary packages, in particular: > Packages that use libtool to

Bug#567845: debian-policy: broken formatting of upgrading-checklist.txt?

On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 03:20:27PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > Bill Allombert writes: > > On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 07:12:39PM +0100, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote: > > >> It looks much better, thank you for your improvements! (I personally > >> will miss the 'old&

Bug#566220: [PATCH] Clarify “copyright and distribution license”

On Sun, Apr 25, 2010 at 06:19:26PM -0500, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org > usertags 566220 + seconded > thanks > > Hi, > > I see seconds by > > Steve Langasek (message #137) > Thijs Kinkhorst (message #142) > Julien Cristau (message #147) > gregor herr

Bug#567845: debian-policy: broken formatting of upgrading-checklist.txt?

On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 07:12:39PM +0100, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote: > Hi Bill > > Thanks, I have made them available at: > > > > It looks much better, thank you for your improvements! (I personally > will miss the 'old' layout, which takes less space/

Re: Bug#575786: dpkg: refuses to unpack package having conflicts+replaces of virtual package

On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 10:12:35PM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > severity 575786 important > thanks > > On Sun, 09 May 2010, Eugene V. Lyubimkin wrote: > > Totally tired with having this bug here and there with different > > packages, I change my mind and bump the severity of this bug to > > ser

Bug#578597: Recommend usage of dpkg-buildflags to initialize CFLAGS and al.

On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 08:46:50AM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: > Bill Allombert writes: > > > On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 09:10:54AM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > >> Package: debian-policy > >> Severity: wishlist > >> > >> The desired outc

Bug#578597: Recommend usage of dpkg-buildflags to initialize CFLAGS and al.

On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 09:10:54AM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > Package: debian-policy > Severity: wishlist > > The desired outcome is that all package grab the values directly from > dpkg-buildflags and that we can stop exporting the variables from > dpkg-buildpackage. That way calling debian/

Bug#572571: packages SHOULD ship checksums (a-la dh_md5sums, but better)

On Thu, Mar 04, 2010 at 11:00:45PM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: > Package: debian-policy > Severity: wishlist > Version: 3.8.4.0 > > [ For the full context, see the -devel thread starting at > http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2010/03/msg00038.html ] > > On Thu, Mar 04, 2010 at 01:12:26P

Re: Removing the manpage requirement for GUI programs?

On Thu, Mar 04, 2010 at 04:32:45PM +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote: > Le jeudi 04 mars 2010 à 15:20 +0100, Bill Allombert a écrit : > > On Thu, Mar 04, 2010 at 10:26:06AM +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote: > > > No. It’s just that they ship with HTML documentation, which is much more

Re: Removing the manpage requirement for GUI programs?

On Thu, Mar 04, 2010 at 10:26:06AM +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote: > Le jeudi 04 mars 2010 à 01:22 +0100, Luca Niccoli a écrit : > > Manuals are not only for documenting command line switches, they > > should actually explain how to use a program. > > I found the lack of good man pages one of the mo

Re: Removing the manpage requirement for GUI programs?

On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 08:06:37PM +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote: > Hi, > > Therefore I propose that we drop the requirement of a manual page if > these conditions are met: > * the program requires graphical interaction with the user, and is > not meant to be used from a script; >

Bug#567845: debian-policy: broken formatting of upgrading-checklist.txt?

On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 08:59:23AM +0100, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote: > Hi Bill > > > > Hello Salvatore, > > > I checked this file before uploading the package but I thought this was > > > the expected behavior of the formatter. In any case, I agree this is quite > > > ugly and I have converted th

Bug#567845: debian-policy: broken formatting of upgrading-checklist.txt?

On Mon, Feb 01, 2010 at 03:40:30PM +0100, Bill Allombert wrote: > On Sun, Jan 31, 2010 at 08:06:24PM +0100, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote: > > Package: debian-policy > > Version: 3.8.4.0 > > Severity: minor > > > > Hi > > > > I noticed, with the

Re: upstream_version

On Tue, Feb 02, 2010 at 04:04:43PM +0100, Dieter Faulbaum wrote: > > Hello debian-policy maintainer, > > trying to understand the comparison of upstream_versions, I found some > packages with a '%' in the upstream_version. > Should the percent character be added to list in the sub-chapter 5.6.12?

Re: [PATCH 0/4] Bug#545548: Documentation updates

On Mon, Feb 01, 2010 at 11:53:55AM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote: > Bill Allombert writes: > > On Mon, Feb 01, 2010 at 04:59:00PM +0100, Bill Allombert wrote: > > >> Please find a SGML version of upgrading-checklist. > > > Here it is. > > I assume that you

Re: [PATCH 0/4] Bug#545548: Documentation updates

On Mon, Feb 01, 2010 at 04:59:00PM +0100, Bill Allombert wrote: > Please find a SGML version of upgrading-checklist. Here it is. Cheers, -- Bill. Imagine a large red swirl here. Policy checklist for upgrading your packages Bill Allombert Josip Ro

Re: [PATCH 0/4] Bug#545548: Documentation updates

On Mon, Oct 05, 2009 at 12:36:44AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > Hi, > > I have now updated the README docs with a slightly cleaner > work-flow. I would like to get a show of hands from the policy team > about this; and if people are OK with this approach (using org-mode, > with perh

Bug#567845: debian-policy: broken formatting of upgrading-checklist.txt?

On Sun, Jan 31, 2010 at 08:06:24PM +0100, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote: > Package: debian-policy > Version: 3.8.4.0 > Severity: minor > > Hi > > I noticed, with the current upload of the debian-policy the file > /usr/share/doc/debian-policy/upgrading-checklist.txt.gz seems to have > a broken 'form

Re: Effect of “should ce rtainly do foo” in policy

On Sun, Jan 24, 2010 at 11:19:33AM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote: > Ben Finney writes: > > Severity-wise, it's the same as "should." Policy is not written in formal > standards language, and certainly here has the normal fuzzy English > meaning. In the first case, for instance, I'd read it as an at

Re: Difficulty rebuilding text files with org-mode

On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 11:11:30AM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote: > Bill Allombert writes: > > On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 09:33:56AM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote: > > >> Just to check, do you have org-mode installed? It works fine for me. > > > No, policy does not build-de

Re: Difficulty rebuilding text files with org-mode

On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 09:33:56AM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote: > Bill Allombert writes: > > > And today unsing the git tree, I get: > > make upgrading-checklist.txt > > /usr/bin/emacs23 --batch -Q -l ./README-css.el -l org -l org-ascii --visit >

Re: Difficulty rebuilding text files with org-mode

On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 05:17:36PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote: > Manoj, when I tried to rebuild upgrading-checklist, I got the following > error: > > % /usr/bin/emacs23 --batch -Q -l ./README-css.el -l org --visit > upgrading-checklist.org --funcall org-export-as-ascii > Loading vc-git... > Autolo

Re: debian-policy is blocking multiarch

On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 11:33:06AM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: > Hi, > > Steve Langasek (vorlon) informed me on irc that the policy changes for > multiarch are commited now but not yet released and this is now blocking > the progress of multiarch as in the case of eglibc: > > 11:21 < vorlo

Bug#554194: ifupdown virtual package name and mass-filing (if accepted)

On Sun, Jan 17, 2010 at 10:11:58AM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > On Sat, Jan 16, 2010 at 06:09:19PM +0100, Bill Allombert wrote: > > > an interface up or down, consistently with configuration, and exit > > > with non-zero if either operation fails. > > >

Bug#554194: ifupdown virtual package name and mass-filing (if accepted)

On Sat, Jan 16, 2010 at 03:31:28PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > On Thu, Nov 05, 2009 at 09:54:37AM +0100, martin f krafft wrote: > [...response that is not very relevant to this mail...] > > There was no further discussion on this item since the above date. Since > I've recently uploaded ipcfg,

Re: does /var/games have to be deleted on purge? (if it's empty..)

On Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 12:34:09AM -0800, Don Armstrong wrote: > On Wed, 06 Jan 2010, Bernhard R. Link wrote: > > Your data in in $HOME. > > Not all data is in $HOME. I have lots of data which is in /srv, > /var/www, or other places, some of which is tightly coupled with a > specific set of packag

Bug#559895: menu: New Category Applications/Multimedia

On Sat, Dec 12, 2009 at 04:03:23PM +0100, Bill Allombert wrote: > reassign 559895 debian-policy > thanks > On Mon, Dec 07, 2009 at 05:45:35PM +0100, Andreas Marschke wrote: > > Package: menu > > Version: 2.1.42 > > Severity: normal > > > > Hi, > > &g

Re: [PATCH 1/1] [bug556972-srivasta]: Explicitly allow /selinux and /sys as FHS exceptions

On Fri, Dec 04, 2009 at 08:53:47AM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > Hi, > > I'm a bit late to the party, but: > > On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 12:33:50PM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > > This patch explicitly allows /sys and /selinux as additional > > directories int he root file system allowed under

Re: use README.source to describe whether committing to VCS is desired

On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 10:05:10AM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: > Dear policy list, > during various NMU, it happened to me that the maintainer of the NMUed > package reply with "thanks a lot, next time please also commit your > changes to our VCS, which is writable by all DDs". > > While we

Bug#561494: devref and policy should agree on where to document tarball repacking

On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 08:28:18AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: > Package: developers-reference > Version: 3.4.3 > > I have a slight, but not overwhelming, preference for having this in > README.source rather than in debian/copyright; however, I think the more > important issue here by far is that

Bug#561413: Policy possibly should not recommend *.la files

On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 02:42:06PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote: > Package: debian-policy > Version: 3.8.3.0 > Severity: wishlist > > Policy currently says: > > An ever increasing number of packages are using libtool to do their > linking. The latest GNU libtools (>= 1.3a) can take advantage

Re: Bug#559895: menu: New Category Applications/Multimedia

reassign 559895 debian-policy thanks On Mon, Dec 07, 2009 at 05:45:35PM +0100, Andreas Marschke wrote: > Package: menu > Version: 2.1.42 > Severity: normal > > Hi, > > I'm here by proposing to add a new category to the menu called > Applications/Multimedia or FreeDesktop.org conform Applications

Re: Bug#560411: debian-policy: Document debconf's SETTITLE command in the debconf-spec

On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 12:06:16AM +0100, Frans Pop wrote: > Package: debian-policy > Version: 3.8.3.0 > Severity: wishlist > Tags: patch > X-Debbugs-CC: debc...@packages.debian.org > > Attached a patch to document the SETTITLE command in the debconf policy. > Inclusion of this command should not

Bug#555980: debian-policy: No policy on statically linked binaries

On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 04:43:18PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote: > Package: debian-policy > Version: 3.8.3.0 > Severity: wishlist > > Unless I'm missing something, and I did a text search through Policy, > Policy is currently silent on the topic of statically linked binaries > other than a brief ment

Bug#555982: debian-policy: RPATH in binaries and shared libraries

On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 04:53:03PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote: > Lintian has the following tag: > > Tag: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath > Severity: serious > > and ftpmaster requires an override for this tag to allow packages into > the archive. I believe Policy is currently silent on this topic.

Re: Bug#545691: diverting telinit

On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 07:23:12AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > On Mon, Oct 26 2009, Bastian Blank wrote: > > > On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 10:40:56AM +0100, Bastian Blank wrote: > >> On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 12:43:18PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > >> > I created a elaborate test case t

Bug#391836: debian-policy: New virtual package: cron-daemon

On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 09:18:45AM +0200, Giacomo A. Catenazzi wrote: > Raphael Hertzog wrote: >> On Wed, 14 Oct 2009, Russ Allbery wrote: > Do both of our proposed cron daemons support that same syntax? (Does > anyone here use bcron to comment on that?) bcron supports the */n syntax,

Re: [Manoj Srivastava] [PATCH 2/4] [bug545548-srivasta]: Make upgradng-checklist a real HTML file

On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 01:15:04PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > On Tue, Oct 13 2009, Bill Allombert wrote: > > > Well I will do that, but first, I like to be remembered why the old > > policy-process document has been removed. > > Well, because it had become

Re: [Manoj Srivastava] [PATCH 2/4] [bug545548-srivasta]: Make upgradng-checklist a real HTML file

On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 10:23:29AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > On Sun, Oct 11 2009, Russ Allbery wrote: > > > Manoj Srivastava writes: > > > >> But someone really should be writing this up, since the bug > >> report was, in my opinion, on point: this stuff needs to be written up, >

Bug#550192: Please number the 10 DSFG points

tags 550192 pending. On Sun, Oct 11, 2009 at 05:22:14PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > Bill Allombert writes: > > > What is wrong with /usr/share/doc/debian/social-contract.txt ? > > > In anyway I propose to apply the patch below. > > Looks great to me. Thanks

Bug#550192: Please number the 10 DSFG points

On Thu, Oct 08, 2009 at 10:47:48AM +0100, Enrico Zini wrote: > Package: debian-policy > Version: 3.8.3.0 > Severity: wishlist > > Hello, > > Would it be possible, just for convenience, to number the DFSG points in > the policy like they are in http://www.debian.org/social_contract ? > > When I a

Re: [Manoj Srivastava] [PATCH 2/4] [bug545548-srivasta]: Make upgradng-checklist a real HTML file

On Mon, Oct 05, 2009 at 03:05:42PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > On Mon, Oct 05 2009, Bill Allombert wrote: > > > On Mon, Oct 05, 2009 at 12:36:44AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > >> Hi, > >> > >> I have now updated the README docs with a sl

Re: [PATCH 0/4] Bug#545548: Documentation updates

On Mon, Oct 05, 2009 at 12:36:44AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > Hi, > > I have now updated the README docs with a slightly cleaner > work-flow. I would like to get a show of hands from the policy team > about this; and if people are OK with this approach (using org-mode, > with perh

Re: Bug#190753: About dropping t he ‘should’ recommendation to rename binary pro grams using a suffix to indicate their programming language.

On Mon, Oct 05, 2009 at 06:52:04PM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote: > Le Mon, Oct 05, 2009 at 05:04:06PM +1100, Ben Finney a écrit : > > Charles Plessy writes: > > > > > My main argument is that it makes Debian installations incompatible > > > with installations on other operating systems as well wit

Re: Bug#391836: debian-policy: New virtual package: cron-daemon

On Mon, Oct 05, 2009 at 10:40:02AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > On Thu, Oct 01 2009, Steve Langasek wrote: > > > On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 01:43:39PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > >> >> Hi, the bcron-run package provides /etc/crontab, which includes > > > >> >> 24 4 * * * root test -x /usr/s

Bug#548116: developers-reference: Section 3.7 - insert a reminder to retire from teams

On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 10:57:07PM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > On Thu, 24 Sep 2009, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: > > Since I guess given the new process discussed in debian-devel we need to > > second > > developers-reference changes too, let me be the first one to do so :) > [...] > > > +Ret

Re: Changes in the maintenance of the Developers Reference

On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 09:56:37AM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote: > Hi, > > Following a discussion on debian-de...@l.d.o[1], the way the Developers > Reference[2] is maintained has been changed, with the aim to make it > more public and easier for people to contribute. > > Changes to developers-ref

Bug#530687: [PATCH] bug530687-srivasta: Support for architecture wildcards

On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 10:35:03AM +0200, Giacomo A. Catenazzi wrote: > Manoj Srivastava wrote: >> + >> + >> + A package may specify an architecture wildcard. Architecture >> + wildcards are in the format os-any and >> + any-cpu. Internally, the package >> +

Bug#545548: [PATCH 0/3] debian-policy package should include a pointer to http://wiki.debian.org/PolicyChangesProcess

On Sun, Sep 13, 2009 at 04:45:41PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > Hi, > > These series of patches add easy to edit sources for a README file, > for documenting the Policy change process, and finally, the upgrading > checklist. The source format is designed to be easy to read and edit, >

Bug#391836: debian-policy: New virtual package: cron-daemon

On Mon, Sep 14, 2009 at 09:32:25AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Mon, Sep 14, 2009 at 03:15:41PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 02:36:26PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: > > > On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 12:54:10AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > >

Bug#391836: debian-policy: New virtual package: cron-daemon

On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 02:36:26PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 12:54:10AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > > > Are there any seconds to the proposal to create a virtual > > package cron-daemon? The rationale is for packages like logratate, > > which otherwise w

Bug#392479: Request for virtual package ircd

On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 12:46:39AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > Hi, > > This is yet another virtual package request I have some > reservations about. There was a long thread on -devel starting at: > http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2006/10/msg00483.html > > Several ob

Bug#525843: support for encoding long descriptions using a "standard" text-based markup language

On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 08:00:41PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > Hi, > > There are some differences in how thee systems define lists; and > I think markdown is more forgiving with simple lists Consider that > continuing lines in markdown lists do not have to be aligned after the > wh

Bug#525843: support for encoding long descriptions using a "standard" text-based markup language

On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 11:25:50PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 05:43:01PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > > Looking at the bug report, I can agree that there is a rough > > consensusabout using a "standard" text-based markup language to > > interpret package lo

Bug#543417: README.source patch system documentation requirements considered harmful

On Tue, Sep 08, 2009 at 12:48:25AM +0100, Chris Lamb wrote: > Wouter Verhelst wrote: > > > I would instead suggest changing the next paragraph to something like > > the following: > > > > ``In case a package uses a build system for which documentation > > sufficient to satisfy this requirement ex

Re: FHS and X manual pages

On Mon, Sep 07, 2009 at 06:29:21PM +0200, Julien Cristau wrote: > > Please don't remove the debian-x cc… Sorry... > On Mon, Sep 7, 2009 at 15:49:52 +0200, Bill Allombert wrote: > > > On Mon, Sep 07, 2009 at 02:29:09PM +0200, Julien Cristau wrote: > > > Hi, &g

Re: FHS and X manual pages

On Mon, Sep 07, 2009 at 02:29:09PM +0200, Julien Cristau wrote: > Hi, > > it's been pointed out to me that we violate FHS ever since [1] is > included in Debian. > > The FHS says "All X Window System manual pages must have an x appended > to the filename." I always wondered what does that actual

Bug#544353: debian-policy: Offer One Big HTML http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/

tag 544353 pending quit On Sat, Sep 05, 2009 at 05:55:47PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > Bill Allombert writes: > > > I have pushed a branch bug544353-ballombe to the git repository with a > > fix that bug. I also attach the patch. > > Looks good to me and I have no objec

Re: Bug#545081: dpkg-dev: dpkg-buildpackage -B should UNCONDITIONALLY invoke debian/rules build-arch

0216f41851f6a98803594cc9ea Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Bill Allombert Date: Sun, 6 Sep 2009 13:18:50 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] Add support for Build-Options: build-arch. Closes: #229357 --- debian/changelog |3 ++- scripts/Dpkg/Fields.pm |2 +- scripts/dpkg-buildpackage

Bug#544981: debian-policy: Discourage native packages that are not tightly specific to Debian

On Sat, Sep 05, 2009 at 01:55:09PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Sat, Sep 05, 2009 at 12:49:23PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > > Hmm. I think that developers who insist on packaging their software > natively are unlikely to be persuaded by anything I have to say, and I think > that there's

Bug#544353: debian-policy: Offer One Big HTML http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/

vide documents in single-file HTML format. +Proposed by Jari Aalto. +Closes: #544353 + + -- Bill Allombert Fri, 04 Sep 2009 14:32:42 +0200 + debian-policy (3.8.3.0) unstable; urgency=low * Policy: Bring Architecture description in line with dpkg-source diff --git a/debian/rules b/d

Bug#544981: debian-policy: Discourage native packages that are not tightly specific to Debian

On Fri, Sep 04, 2009 at 10:56:43AM +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: > Package: debian-policy > Version: 3.8.3.0 > Severity: wishlist > > Hi, > > Given the recent thread in debian-devel[1], I think we should document in > policy that packages that are not tightly related to Debian shouldn't be

Re: Bug#540861: Cannot reproduce FTBFS - looks like the buildd ignores policy 7.7

On Thu, Sep 03, 2009 at 09:57:00PM +0200, Luk Claes wrote: > Niels Thykier wrote: > > Hi Kurt > > > > Looking at your build log it seems like it does not fetch the > > Build-Depends-Indep before invoking "debian/rules build", which it > > should according to the policy [#7.7]. > > Which is wrong

Bug#544353: debian-policy: Offer One Big HTML http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/

On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 12:03:53AM +0300, Jari Aalto wrote: > Package: debian-policy > Version: 3.8.3.0 > Severity: wishlist > > > Please offer link to a One Big HTML page, which would: > > - be easier to search (forward, backward) I use the text version for that reason... > - store to browser

Bug#543417: README.source patch system documentation requirements considered harmful

On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 10:33:14PM +0100, Chris Lamb wrote: > Package: debian-policy > Version: 3.8.3.0 > > Hi Policy hackers. > > I feel there is a problem with §4.14 ("Source package handling: > debian/README.source") that is a little harmful at present. > > Basically, I feel that assuming tha

Bug#538665: debian-policy: "Info documents" section is outdated

On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 11:36:29AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > Bill Allombert writes: > > On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 09:52:59AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > > >> The generated file should contain a section like: > >> > >> @dircategory Individual utilities

Bug#538665: debian-policy: "Info documents" section is outdated

On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 09:52:59AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > Bill Allombert writes: > > >> Reading the comment I will assume that debiandoc2info is the only package > >> that need to be fixed and waive this part. I will also try to get > >> debiandoc2info fix

Bug#538665: debian-policy: "Info documents" section is outdated

On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 12:14:16PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > Raphael Hertzog writes: > > On Fri, 14 Aug 2009, Russ Allbery wrote: > > >> --- a/policy.sgml > >> +++ b/policy.sgml > >> @@ -8867,7 +8867,10 @@ name ["syshostname"]: > >> scripts. This is no longer necessary. The insta

Bug#538665: debian-policy: "Info documents" section is outdated

On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 11:51:19AM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote: > > > 4) While I have no technical objection to the 'START-INFO-DIR-ENTRY' / > > > 'END-INFO-DIR-ENTRY' bits, currently at least one program generating > > > info files (debiandoc2i

Bug#538665: debian-policy: "Info documents" section is outdated

On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 10:56:18AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > Bill Allombert writes: > > > 1) As written, the policy change induce maintainers to make changes to > > their packages that will cause them to have a bug. This is not > > acceptable. > > > 2) As dis

Bug#538665: debian-policy: "Info documents" section is outdated

On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 06:54:12PM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > On Tue, 11 Aug 2009, Bill Allombert wrote: > > 1) As written, the policy change induce maintainers to make changes to their > > packages that will cause them to have a bug. This is not acceptable. > >

Re: Automatic Debug Packages

On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 03:59:22PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 09:46:49PM +0100, Roger Leigh wrote: > > Reading through this thread, I don't see a compelling reason for using > > a .ddeb extension given that they are just regular .debs, nor for > > keeping the packages se

Bug#538665: debian-policy: "Info documents" section is outdated

On Fri, Aug 07, 2009 at 03:37:56PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > Sven Joachim writes: > > > Section 12.2, "Info documents", contains outdated information. Nowadays > > info files are installed via a dpkg trigger provided by the install-info > > package, and maintainer scripts should not invoke in

Bug#485559: Re: consistent tftpboot directory location [RFC]

On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 08:37:42AM +0200, Franklin PIAT wrote: > Package: debian-policy > Severity: wishlist > > I've worked on the following policy snippet. As far as I am concerned, I > would rather make the default location compulsory, and probably drop > "tftp-get-root-location" then. 1. If /

Bug#485559: Location of tftpd folder

On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 05:04:15PM +0200, Daniel Baumann wrote: > Daniel Baumann wrote: > > everybody seems to agree that we agree.. what now? > > atftpd mainainer replied some days ago to the bug i opened against the > atftpd that next upload will change server root to /srv/tftp as well > which m

Re: Discouraging automatic creation of configuration files

On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 02:02:18PM +, Michael T wrote: > Some alternatives to packages creating configuration files (often best handled > in co-operation with upstream) are: > * Ensuring that the package has reasonable defaults if no configuration file > is > supplied. > * Cleanly separate d

Bug#485559: Location of tftpd folder

On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 01:50:27PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > Daniel Baumann writes: > > Frank Lin PIAT wrote: > > >> There was already some discussion on this topic. Would it be possible > >> to define the location in the policy? See bug #485559 > > > fwiw, using /srv/tftp as tftp server roo

Bug#535577: debian-policy: what to do with user-generated data (databases) on purge

On Fri, Jul 03, 2009 at 01:51:53PM +0200, Bas Zoetekouw wrote: > Package: debian-policy > Version: 3.8.2.0 > Severity: wishlist > > Currently, policy is rather unclear on what to do with user-generated > content, such as the content of databases, on purge. Afaics, the only > cases that are mentio

Bug#522217: debian-policy: Drop requirement to pre-depend on x11-common

On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 09:43:57AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > Bill Allombert writes: > > > My comment would be that we should avoid implying that putting window > > managers config file in /etc/X11/.../ is a good idea... But of course > > it is not the time for po

Bug#522217: debian-policy: Drop requirement to pre-depend on x11-common

On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 12:07:35PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > "Bernhard R. Link" writes: > > * Russ Allbery [090620 23:55]: > > >> I'm not sure either. This was already in Policy prior to this round > >> of changes, of course, but maybe since we're revising this section > >> anyway, this is t

<    2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   11   >