Re: debian directory in upstream CVS
On Fri, Apr 05, 2002 at 03:28:39PM +, michael d. ivey wrote: > I've started a Wiki page at > http://wiki.debian.net/DebianWiki/DebianDirectoryInUpstreamCVS to > gather thoughts on whether it is a good idea or a bad idea to include > the debian/ dir in upstream CVS. I'd appreciate comments, either by > mail or Wiki. As far as I'm concerned, having debian/ in upstream is a non-issue. If upstream would like to provide snapshots of Debian packages or simply to have a full spread of package configurations for the users that download the software, that's great! How hard is it to maintain someone else's debian/ directory? As hard as it is to run patch(1) or mv(1). The same practices apply. Changes to a package directory or spec file do not necessitate changes in upstream versions. Add the '-1' or '-1.1' that we normally use for package versioning. Send the patches to upstream as a low priority fix. Do you need CVS access to upstream? Na. Does upstream even use CVS? Perhaps. Is it important? Na. -- Chad Walstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | a.k.a. ^chewie http://www.wookimus.net/| s.k.a. gunnarr pgpq3fe2MhAUd.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: How to put files at a location determined at install-time.
On Mon, Dec 31, 2001 at 07:09:41PM +0100, Marc L. de Bruin wrote: > On my system, I have hde1 (mounted as /), and md0 (hde2+hdg1, mounted as > /raid1). The home-dirs are on /raid1/home and I have a symlink /home -> > /raid1/home (this probably is a bad thing, I know). No, this isn't necessarily bad. However, why don't you specify the location of your home directories for specific accounts in your /etc/passwd, and specify your default home directory in the user management utilities? If you use /raid1/home as your home directory, you won't need to rely upon symbolic links and your applications will have one less system call to make for each home directory file access. Alternatively, look into Linux LVM (http://www.sistina.com/lvm). It's current release is quite up to date in the 2.4.16+ kernels, and I believe there's a current package in Debian for lvm tools. You can logically manage your raid1 partition into multiple, growable/shrinkable logical paritions/filesystems. Also, you could use the mount --bind option to use 2.4.x VFS. bash# mount --bind /raid1/home /home > So, the root-user might want the files to be physically installed on > /raid1, e.g. /raid1/mydata, so that a user "blah" (/raid1/home/blah) can > make a hardlink from /raid1/home/blah/afile to /raid1/mydata/afile. This sounds like a broken software package if it depends upon hardlinks. Hardlinks should be used with caution and only under specific circumstances. A good example is linking a file under multiple directories on the same filesystem when the directories are used as a form of data organization. (For example, the MH Rand email format.) Additionally, user home directories should not be touched by a Debian installation package. When the user uses this application, why does it not search a predefined path for files? Is there no $APPSHARE variable or configuration option for a user-based RC file (~/.)? Is there no default RC file for the application in /etc//? Could you provide the user with this functionality? Could upstream? -- Chad Walstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | a.k.a. ^chewie http://www.wookimus.net/| s.k.a. gunnarr Get my public key, ICQ#, etc. Send email w/the Subject: "get help"
Re: [FLAME WARNING] Linux Standards Base and Debian
On Wed, May 09, 2001 at 01:15:46PM +0200, Wichert Akkerman wrote: > Previously Marcus Brinkmann wrote: > > The LSB doesn't need the full power of a complex packaging system, > > and it is unlikely they would get it right without really using > > it. > > I disagree with that. The people who are involved with that > particular bit of LSB happen to be a dpkg maintainer, the apt > author, rpm upstream, the author of dpkg-rpm and a few other capable > people. If you don't trust that group you may as well give up and > start your own packaging system. Trust has nothing to do with it. Frankly, I agree that the format of the package file being something that standard *NIX tools can manipulate. I agree that a packaging "system" should be unnecessary to install a binary package. Marcus is right on the money with his statement. However, I will articulate Wichert's implied statement: get involved with the LSB. Bickering about it on debian-devel isn't going to get people very far. A little research[1] turns up the following on how to get involved: Invitation To Participate Anyone wishing to participate in the LSB project either as an observer or as a contributor should join one of the mailing lists[2]. There are no fees for participation or membership. 1. http://www.linuxbase.org 2. http://www.linuxbase.org/lists.html Related threads: 3. http://lists.debian.org/lsb-discuss-0010/msg00012.html 4. http://lists.debian.org/lsb-discuss-0010/msg00036.html 5. http://lists.debian.org/lsb-discuss-0007/msg2.html 6. http://lists.debian.org/lsb-discuss-0105/msg00025.html Good Hunting! -- Chad Walstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | a.k.a. ^chewie http://www.wookimus.net/| s.k.a. gunnarr Key fingerprint = B4AB D627 9CBD 687E 7A31 1950 0CC7 0B18 206C 5AFD pgprN7UihBBmW.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: support for older distributions
On Mon, May 07, 2001 at 02:45:53PM +0200, Russell Coker wrote: > I would like a version of potato that is not entirely frozen. > ... > I am willing to be involved in back-porting packages (there's many > things that I back-port for my own use and should share). > ... > Also we have to consider the long-term view of this. I would > like to see back-ports to woody being done in a year's time... It's not an easy request to address, really. Opinion is largely subjective as to what one would find valuable for potato, and you run into the problem of making "slushy" potato look more like woody. It's a catch 22 if you take it too far. I think the long view on this subject focuses less on back-ports and more on shorter release cycles. If we can get release cycles for stable down to a year or less, back-ports would simply be less important. So, contribute your efforts to improving and stabilizing woody, so we can get it out the door! ;-) -- Chad Walstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | a.k.a. ^chewie http://www.wookimus.net/| s.k.a. gunnarr Key fingerprint = B4AB D627 9CBD 687E 7A31 1950 0CC7 0B18 206C 5AFD pgpJiiJ72kfIV.pgp Description: PGP signature
