Jonathan Nieder writes:
> Raphael Hertzog wrote:
>> On Sat, 21 Aug 2010, Russ Allbery wrote:
>>> Hm. All the words that I had intended to be there are there. I clearly
>>> need to rephrase it somehow, though, if it's not clear. How about:
>>>
>>> When two packages both declare the same con
Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> On Sat, 21 Aug 2010, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> Hm. All the words that I had intended to be there are there. I clearly
>> need to rephrase it somehow, though, if it's not clear. How about:
>>
>> When two packages both declare the same conffile, they may
>> see left-
Russ Allbery (20/08/2010):
> Objections or seconds?
Seconded. Both this version and the other, reworded version.
Mraw,
KiBi.
> diff --git a/policy.sgml b/policy.sgml
> index 9037de8..5fdf775 100644
> --- a/policy.sgml
> +++ b/policy.sgml
> @@ -7950,22 +7950,6 @@ ln -fs ../sbin/sendmail debian/t
On Sat, 21 Aug 2010, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Raphael Hertzog writes:
> > On Fri, 20 Aug 2010, Russ Allbery wrote:
>
> >> +
> >> + A package that declares the same conffile as another,
> >> + conflicting package may see left-over configuration files from
> >> + that other package.
Raphael Hertzog writes:
> On Fri, 20 Aug 2010, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> +
>> +A package that declares the same conffile as another,
>> +conflicting package may see left-over configuration files from
>> +that other package.
> EPARSE on this sentence, it looks like some
On Fri, 20 Aug 2010, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Objections or seconds?
Looks mostly good except:
> @@ -8014,6 +7998,34 @@ ln -fs ../sbin/sendmail debian/tmp/usr/bin/runq
> and which manages the shared configuration files. (The
> sgml-base package is a good example.)
>
> +
Raphael Hertzog writes:
> On Wed, 18 Aug 2010, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> What happens if you have a package on the system that's removed but not
>> purged and you install another package (conflicting with the first)
>> that contains the same conffile? I suspect the conffile will be
>> treated as lo
On Wed, 18 Aug 2010, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Yann Dirson writes:
> > Richard Braakman writes:
>
> >> Yesterday I noticed that Debian policy is incorrect on this:
>
> >> Only packages that are tagged *conflicting* with each other may
> >> specify the same file as `conffile'. A package may
Yann Dirson writes:
> Richard Braakman writes:
>> Yesterday I noticed that Debian policy is incorrect on this:
>> Only packages that are tagged *conflicting* with each other may
>> specify the same file as `conffile'. A package may not modify a
>> configuration file of another pac
9 matches
Mail list logo
