Robert Edmonds:
The relevant text from the policy manual, §9.11: [...]
The Debian Policy Manual never got updated in the wake of the Debian
systemd Hoo-Hah. It remains written from the viewpoint that System 5
init and rc are the defaults, and that upstart is a novelty addendum.
Several
Robert Edmonds:
The relevant text from the policy manual, §9.11: [...]
Ansgar Burchardt:
Was that changed since the default init system was changed? It pretty
much still reads like Policy still assumes that sysvinit is the
default init system. It also still mentions upstart in 9.11.1;
Bas Zoetekouw writes (Re: QUESTION: Debian Policy: Manual pages):
Why a recommends? In order to satisfy the spirit of policy (every
binary must have a man page) it would need to be a depends, imo.
I think the point of policy is to ensure the manpage exists, not to
require that it be installed
* Ian Jackson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [080224 09:18]:
Bas Zoetekouw writes (Re: QUESTION: Debian Policy: Manual pages):
Why a recommends? In order to satisfy the spirit of policy (every
binary must have a man page) it would need to be a depends, imo.
I think the point of policy is to ensure
Hi,
Answers:
a) Yes, they are *really* distributed in three separate tarballs.
b) The three tarballs are not released in sync.
Conclusion:
1) a.deb b.deb shall depend on c.deb
2) a.deb b.deb shall contain lintian overrides.
Thanks for the useful feedback!
[NOTE: If replying, please keep my
On 14/02/2008, Russ Allbery wrote:
I thought that tag in lintian already had a note that you should add
an override if the man pages are shipped in a different package on
which this package has a dependency. Apparently I was just imagining
things.
ISTR it's the case for icons in desktop/menu
Le 14 févr. 08 à 17:04, Harshula a écrit :
Hi,
re: http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-docs.html#s12.1
---
Each program, utility, and function should have an associated manual
page included in the same package. [...]
Hi
Firstly, this kind of question would be better suited in the
debian-mentors list.
Harshula wrote:
Here's the example:
1) a.tar.gz - a.deb
2) b.tar.gz - b.deb
3) c.tar.gz - c.deb
Are they really distributed in three separate upstream tarballs? If they
are, perhaps it would be better
Harshula wrote:
Hi,
re: http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-docs.html#s12.1
---
Each program, utility, and function should have an associated manual
page included in the same package. It is suggested that all
Hi,
re: http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-docs.html#s12.1
---
Each program, utility, and function should have an associated manual
page included in the same package. It is suggested that all
configuration files also have a
Le vendredi 15 février 2008 à 03:04 +1100, Harshula a écrit :
1) a.tar.gz - a.deb
2) b.tar.gz - b.deb
3) c.tar.gz - c.deb
c.tar.gz contains only documentation, including man pages for
binaries/scripts in a.tar.gz and b.tar.gz.
Then a and b should Recommend: c, regardless of how the
Harshula [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Since c.deb contains all the man pages, running lintian on a.deb results
in:
---
W: m17n-db: binary-without-manpage usr/bin/m17n-db
N:
N: Each binary in /usr/bin, /usr/sbin, /bin, /sbin or
Hi Josselin!
You wrote:
Le vendredi 15 février 2008 à 03:04 +1100, Harshula a écrit :
1) a.tar.gz - a.deb
2) b.tar.gz - b.deb
3) c.tar.gz - c.deb
c.tar.gz contains only documentation, including man pages for
binaries/scripts in a.tar.gz and b.tar.gz.
Then a and b should
On Jun 22, Bruce Perens wrote
Debian policy for systems 2.0 and above will be to have _no_editor_
as part of the base system. If you want an editor, you must install
Ahh... That should put an end to the endless editor threads. I'm all for
it.
Christian
PS Is the bruce-bunchofnumbers
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Francesco Tapparo) wrote on 22.06.97 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Jun 22, Kai Henningsen wrote
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christian Hudon) wrote on 21.06.97 in
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Newbies should *not* be dumped into vi by default. It's just too
user-hostile.
There's only
From: Francesco Tapparo [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Of course ae will be used in the boot disks, but in the default
installation, joe must be the choiche, IMO.
Debian policy for systems 2.0 and above will be to have _no_editor_
as part of the base system. If you want an editor, you must install
--
Bruce
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christian Hudon) wrote on 21.06.97 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Newbies should *not* be dumped into vi by default. It's just too
user-hostile.
There's only one text mode editor that's not just as user-hostile, and
that's ae. That one seems to be completely unacceptable as a
On Jun 22, James Troup wrote
Francesco Tapparo [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Joe is much better, IMO, and it's very newbie-friendly.
hades|14:07:32 ~ [507] $ls -l $(type -path joe) $(type -path ae)
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root23968 May 5 01:36 /bin/ae
-rwxr-xr-x 5 root root
On Jun 17, Scott Ellis wrote
I believe that the plan is to have them managed by update-alternatives,
and therefore be symlinks. Less will probably have a higher priority than
more, although I don't know who gets to win the war over which editor is
best, although I suspect a vi varient on
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
On Sat, 21 Jun 1997, Christian Hudon wrote:
On Jun 17, Scott Ellis wrote
I believe that the plan is to have them managed by update-alternatives,
and therefore be symlinks. Less will probably have a higher priority than
more, although I don't know who
On Sun, 15 Jun 1997, David Frey wrote:
My comments on Christian's proposal (which is very good, thank you christian):
TOPIC 1: policy for user and group ids (uids, gids)
Wouldn't it be better to start the user uid range with 100 as most other
Unices do?
Sorry, but I don't get your point.
David Frey [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
TOPIC 4: editor/pager policy
What is the benefit of /usr/bin/sensible-{editor,pager}?
Why don't we just default to EDITOR=/usr/bin/vi and PAGER=/usr/bin/more
if both variables are unset? (auch, don't beat me)
That might enable us to get
On Tue, 17 Jun 1997, David Frey wrote:
The files /usr/bin/{editor,pager} will be managed through alternatives.
Since alternatives can be changed by the sysadmin only, we allow the user
to define EDITOR and PAGER to override this.
That's why we need sensible-{editor,pager}. These are
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED],
David Frey [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
TOPIC 4: editor/pager policy
What is the benefit of /usr/bin/sensible-{editor,pager}?
Why don't we just default to EDITOR=/usr/bin/vi and PAGER=/usr/bin/more
if both variables are unset? (auch, don't beat me)
That
On Mon, 16 Jun 1997, Mark Baker wrote:
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED],
David Frey [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
TOPIC 4: editor/pager policy
What is the benefit of /usr/bin/sensible-{editor,pager}?
Why don't we just default to EDITOR=/usr/bin/vi and PAGER=/usr/bin/more
if both
My comments on Christian's proposal (which is very good, thank you christian):
TOPIC 1: policy for user and group ids (uids, gids)
Wouldn't it be better to start the user uid range with 100 as most other
Unices do?
TOPIC 4: editor/pager policy
What is the benefit of
26 matches
Mail list logo
