Guillem Jover writes:
> On Tue, 2017-08-22 at 10:44:32 -0700, Sean Whitton wrote:
>> Could you explain "two chapters that include the old sections", please?
>> Or just say which sections are wrong.
>> We tried hard to avoid this, so it's definitely a bug.
> Take section
Hi,
Bastien ROUCARIÈS wrote:
> set -e is not suffisant to detect error in pipe context
>
> cat nonexistant | sed s/some//g will hapilly return 0 and do not fail
>
> exec 3>&1; s=$(exec 4>&1 >&3; { cat nonexistant ; echo $? >&4; } | sed
> s/some//g ) && exit $s
>
> this could be simplified by
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org
Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was
spwhit...@spwhitton.name).
> limit package debian-policy
Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy'
Limit
Hello,
On Tue, Aug 22 2017, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> So while using it I noticed that it has been installed with an
>> extremely generic name, for something that is a global resource. I
>> think it should be renamed to debian-policy.
>
> Ack, yes, this is my fault. Will fix.
Whoever fixes this
Processing control commands:
> retitle -1 Include multi-page HTML in package
Bug #872895 [debian-policy] debian-policy: Split html for policy lost
Changed Bug title to 'Include multi-page HTML in package' from 'debian-policy:
Split html for policy lost'.
--
872895:
control: retitle -1 Include multi-page HTML in package
^ see below for explanation
Hello,
On Tue, Aug 22 2017, Mattia Rizzolo wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 12:10:36PM -0700, Sean Whitton wrote:
>> - it would be nice to include the multi-page rendering in the package
>
> More than nice,
On Tue, Aug 22 2017, Guillem Jover wrote:
> Take section «10.9.1. The use of dpkg-statoverride», this is correct
> on the HTML output and info file, on the PDF it's a section w/o a
> number inside §2.10.9. I've not checked the EPUB file.
Thanks!
> And I've just noticed on the info files it's
Guillem Jover writes:
> Package: debian-policy
> Version: 4.1.0.0
> While I'm not a very big fan of info files (even when using pinfo),
> it seems for now it's the only way to get section numbers w/o having
> to use a browser. :/
w3m works very well, FWIW. (And yeah, the
Aurelien Jarno writes:
> On 2017-08-21 14:35, Sean Whitton wrote:
>> 9.1.1
>> Only the dynamic linker may install files to /lib64/.
> How is that supposed to work for the multilib glibc? For example
> libc6-amd64:i386 installs all its libraries into /lib64. We don't
Processing control commands:
> tag -1 +moreinfo
Bug #872893 [debian-policy] debian-policy: Chapters, sections, appendices and
numbering
Added tag(s) moreinfo.
--
872893: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=872893
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with
control: tag -1 +moreinfo
Hello Guillem,
On Tue, Aug 22 2017, Guillem Jover wrote:
> At least on the PDF output, the section numbers are wrong, as there
> are now two chapters that include the old sections.
Could you explain "two chapters that include the old sections", please?
Or just say
Package: www.debian.org
Severity: important
Hello webmasters,
The Debian Policy Manual just changed its HTML output and while the
HTML has published, the CSS and included images have not.
Looking at [1], the CSS and included images should have been published
because they're still installed to
Hello Hideki,
On Tue, Aug 22 2017, Hideki Yamane wrote:
> Thanks for uploading policy version 4.1.0, but it is not fully uploaded
> to the site, seems that only index.html is done. For example,
> https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/_static/nature.css doesn't exist.
I get 403 not 404; I
Hello Guillem,
On Tue, Aug 22 2017, Guillem Jover wrote:
> It seems that an html.tar.gz has leaked (?) into the .deb, which
> contains the single single html file plus ancillary files. It is
> not clear whether this is an intentional change as it's not listed
> on the changelog. It looks at
Hello Guillem,
On Tue, Aug 22 2017, Guillem Jover wrote:
> This version has lost the distinction between a single policy html and
> the one with different files per chapter. This will break links.
This was intentional. The single page output is much more useful to
casual readers wanting to
Package: debian-policy
Version: 4.1.0.0
Hi!
The info file, on its initial page contains a Menu with the following
entries:
,---
* Menu:
* Version::
* Contents::
* Legal Notice::
`---
For which Version contains a one-liner. It would be nicer if Contents
would get expanded into the main Menu.
Hi!
On Tue, 2017-08-22 at 09:44:02 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Guillem Jover writes:
> > Package: debian-policy
> > Version: 4.1.0.0
>
> > While I'm not a very big fan of info files (even when using pinfo),
> > it seems for now it's the only way to get section numbers w/o
Hi!
On Tue, 2017-08-22 at 11:09:37 -0700, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> Sean Whitton wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 22 2017, Guillem Jover wrote:
> >> This version has lost the distinction between a single policy html and
> >> the one with different files per chapter. This will break links.
> >
> > This was
control: tag -1 +pending
Hello,
On Tue, Aug 22 2017, Mattia Rizzolo wrote:
> LGTM, seconded.
Applied, thanks.
> That said, I'd expect the upgrade-checklist to say that this change is
> about clarifying that debian/copyright must exist (where before it was
> "fine" not existing).
Not sure
Processing control commands:
> tag -1 +pending
Bug #683222 [debian-policy] say explicitly that debian/changelog is required in
source packages
Added tag(s) pending.
--
683222: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=683222
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with
Hello Jonathan,
On Tue, Aug 22 2017, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> I don't completely understand. The old rendering had both single page
> and multi-page versions. If I understand what you're saying, it is a
> reason that the single-page version is useful, but why does that
> preclude also
On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 12:10:36PM -0700, Sean Whitton wrote:
> - it would be nice to include the multi-page rendering in the package
More than nice, please. I don't really deal with huge single-page
documents. Besides you wrote:
> The single page output is much more useful to casual readers
Processing control commands:
> tags -1 pending
Bug #872896 [debian-policy] debian-policy: An html.tar.gz has leaked into the
.deb?
Added tag(s) pending.
--
872896: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=872896
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Control: tags -1 pending
Guillem Jover writes:
> The info file, on its initial page contains a Menu with the following
> entries:
> ,---
> * Menu:
> * Version::
> * Contents::
> * Legal Notice::
> `---
> For which Version contains a one-liner. It would be nicer if
Processing control commands:
> tags -1 pending
Bug #872950 [debian-policy] debian-policy: Too much indirection in info file
menus
Added tag(s) pending.
--
872950: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=872950
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Control: tags -1 pending
Guillem Jover writes:
> It seems that an html.tar.gz has leaked (?) into the .deb, which
> contains the single single html file plus ancillary files. It is
> not clear whether this is an intentional change as it's not listed
> on the changelog. It
Guillem Jover writes:
> While I'm not a very big fan of info files (even when using pinfo),
> it seems for now it's the only way to get section numbers w/o having
> to use a browser. :/ So while using it I noticed that it has been
> installed with an extremely generic name,
Control: tags -1 pending
Guillem Jover writes:
> This version has lost the distinction between a single policy html and
> the one with different files per chapter. This will break links.
Okay, I think this is fixed in Git and Policy should now ship both the
single-file and
Control: tags -1 pending
Guillem Jover writes:
> The appendices are also not easily distinguishable from the other
> sections as they also use numbers intead of say letters.
This is https://github.com/sphinx-doc/sphinx/issues/2502. I'm going to
close out this specific bug
Processing control commands:
> tags -1 pending
Bug #872893 [debian-policy] debian-policy: Chapters, sections, appendices and
numbering
Added tag(s) pending.
--
872893: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=872893
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with
Guillem Jover writes:
> At least on the PDF output, the section numbers are wrong, as there are
> now two chapters that include the old sections.
I think I've fixed this. For reference, the first problem was the
headings in the top-level document for the abstract and the
Guillem Jover writes:
> Well, that's unfortunate. :( And I've just noticed on the info files
> it's just worse as they do not get their section numbers reset so
> they keep incrementing from the last chapter index. For example
> «Binary packages (…)» used to be appendix B,
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org
Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org).
> limit package debian-policy
Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy'
Limit currently set to
Processing control commands:
> tags -1 pending
Bug #872895 [debian-policy] Include multi-page HTML in package
Added tag(s) pending.
--
872895: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=872895
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Package: debian-policy
Version: 4.0.1.0
Severity: normal
set -e is not suffisant to detect error in pipe context
cat nonexistant | sed s/some//g will hapilly return 0 and do not fail
exec 3>&1; s=$(exec 4>&1 >&3; { cat nonexistant ; echo $? >&4; } | sed
s/some//g ) && exit $s
this could be
Guillem Jover writes:
> The info file, on its initial page contains a Menu with the following
> entries:
> ,---
> * Menu:
> * Version::
> * Contents::
> * Legal Notice::
> `---
> For which Version contains a one-liner. It would be nicer if Contents
> would get expanded
Package: debian-policy
Version: 4.1.0.0
Hi!
This version has lost the distinction between a single policy html and
the one with different files per chapter. This will break links.
Thanks,
Guillem
Package: debian-policy
Version: 4.1.0.0
Hi!
It seems that an html.tar.gz has leaked (?) into the .deb, which
contains the single single html file plus ancillary files. It is
not clear whether this is an intentional change as it's not listed
on the changelog. It looks at least a bit redundant.
Package: debian-policy
Version: 4.1.0.0
Hi!
While I'm not a very big fan of info files (even when using pinfo),
it seems for now it's the only way to get section numbers w/o having
to use a browser. :/ So while using it I noticed that it has been
installed with an extremely generic name, for
Package: debian-policy
Version: 4.1.0.0
Hi!
At least on the PDF output, the section numbers are wrong, as there
are now two chapters that include the old sections.
The appendices are also not easily distinguishable from the other
sections as they also use numbers intead of say letters.
Thanks,
Hi,
On 2017-08-21 14:35, Sean Whitton wrote:
> Hello everyone,
>
> Debian Policy 4.1.0.0 is on its way into unstable.
>
> The source of the Policy Manual is now in reStructuredText, and the
> Sphinx toolchain is used to produce our output formats. This has
> enabled us to introduce new ePub
On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 05:22:12PM -0700, Sean Whitton wrote:
> Commenting on Charles' patch, I think that it would be clearer to have
> the 'should' and 'must' requirements in separate sentences.
Good idea.
> diff --git a/policy/ch-source.rst b/policy/ch-source.rst
> index f706a13..89b355a
Hi,
Thanks for uploading policy version 4.1.0, but it is not fully uploaded
to the site, seems that only index.html is done. For example,
https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/_static/nature.css doesn't exist.
--
Regards,
Hideki Yamane henrich @ debian.or.jp/org
43 matches
Mail list logo