Luca Boccassi writes:
> And I am more than a bit sad that sensible, clear-cut, binding and
> already-implemented decisions taken by our constitutional bodies get
> constantly second-guessed and belittled because of an irrational
> attachment to inconsequential accidents of history. But what can
On Fri, 8 Sept 2023 at 00:37, gregor herrmann wrote:
>
> On Thu, 07 Sep 2023 21:28:15 +0100, Luca Boccassi wrote:
>
> > Yes, that is fine by me, as explained in later replies my main
> > intention is to fix the issue that some wording is being used to
> > reintroduce things that should not be
On Thu, 07 Sep 2023 21:28:15 +0100, Luca Boccassi wrote:
> Yes, that is fine by me, as explained in later replies my main
> intention is to fix the issue that some wording is being used to
> reintroduce things that should not be reintroduced
If I understand you correctly, "Reintroduc[ing] things
On Thu, 7 Sept 2023 at 21:22, Helmut Grohne wrote:
>
> Hi Luca,
>
> On Wed, Sep 06, 2023 at 10:50:14PM +0100, Luca Boccassi wrote:
> > Package: debian-policy
> > X-Debbugs-Cc: j...@debian.org hel...@subdivi.de
> >
> > Debian only supports merged-usr since Bookworm. We should update policy
> > to
Hi Luca,
On Wed, Sep 06, 2023 at 10:50:14PM +0100, Luca Boccassi wrote:
> Package: debian-policy
> X-Debbugs-Cc: j...@debian.org hel...@subdivi.de
>
> Debian only supports merged-usr since Bookworm. We should update policy
> to reference /usr/bin/sh and similar paths to describe recommended
>
> "Bill" == Bill Allombert writes:
Bill> I would. Having two paths for the same thing is a technical
Bill> debt going forward.
I think the TC has made it clear we're committed to usrmerge at this
point, and I think that one of the drivers behind usrmerge is that we
gain more from
On Wed, Sep 06, 2023 at 04:51:10PM -0600, Sam Hartman wrote:
> > "Luca" == Luca Boccassi writes:
> Luca> /bin/sh is not universally compatible with non-Linux OSes.
>
> I claim it is more compatible.
>
>
> Luca> Also I thought that policy should not be used to beat other
> Luca>
> "Ansgar" == Ansgar writes:
Ansgar> On Wed, 2023-09-06 at 16:51 -0600, Sam Hartman wrote:
>> > > > > > "Luca" == Luca Boccassi writes:
>> Luca> /bin/sh is not universally compatible with non-Linux OSes.
>>
>> I claim it is more compatible.
Ansgar> Why should
On Wed, 2023-09-06 at 16:51 -0600, Sam Hartman wrote:
> > > > > > "Luca" == Luca Boccassi writes:
> Luca> /bin/sh is not universally compatible with non-Linux OSes.
>
> I claim it is more compatible.
Why should that matter to Debian?
Should Debian invest resources to make upstream software
On Thu, 7 Sept 2023 at 09:41, Simon McVittie wrote:
>
> On Wed, 06 Sep 2023 at 16:51:10 -0600, Sam Hartman wrote:
> > I'd consider it a non-RC bug if someone were manually writing
> > #!/usr/bin/sh
>
> As long as our official buildds are non-merged-/usr, I would consider use
> of that path in
On Thu, 07 Sep 2023 at 00:50:54 +0100, Luca Boccassi wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Sept 2023 at 00:45, Sam Hartman wrote:
> > I.E. in the cases you adjust, I think it is already
> > not a bug, and it would be inappropriate to use existing policy language
> > to complain about which interpreter path people
On Wed, 06 Sep 2023 at 16:51:10 -0600, Sam Hartman wrote:
> I'd consider it a non-RC bug if someone were manually writing
> #!/usr/bin/sh
As long as our official buildds are non-merged-/usr, I would consider use
of that path in scripts that get run at package build time to be
potentially RC, in
12 matches
Mail list logo
