On Mon, Feb 18, 2008 at 12:49:20PM +, Simon Huggins wrote:
I've attached the lines that I think are wrong to this message.
I filed bugs today for those that are still broken.
--
Simon [ [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] *\ Ah, here we are - `How to Raise the \**
** ]-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-[ **\
On Mon, 18 Feb 2008, Simon Huggins wrote:
So doing this on the Packages file from amd64 in unstable currently
there are list problems in the following dd-list'd packages.
I think mostly they could easily just be s/^ / / on the affected lines
though sipcalc is interesting in that it uses two
Hi Andreas,
On Sun, Feb 17, 2008 at 02:14:30PM +0100, Andreas Tille wrote:
On Sun, 17 Feb 2008, Simon Huggins wrote:
http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-controlfields.html#s-f-Description
The others are probably bugs then. Do you have a list to name and
shame?
Ahh- shame on my first
Hello,
some quick look into the packages files I found out that (at least)
four different ways to notate bullet lists in long descriptions.
Developers us '-', '+', '*' or '=' signs to mark the beginning of
some list (that whould have been an \begin{itemize} in LaTeX or
ul in HTML). The
On Sun, Feb 17, 2008 at 09:22:17AM +0100, Andreas Tille wrote:
On the other hand
http://packages.debian.org/sid/ht
is perfectly formatted on the web pages. It seems to be according
to the fact that parts of the description where a line starts with
two spaces are wrapped into pre tags
On Sun, 17 Feb 2008, Simon Huggins wrote:
Yes.
http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-controlfields.html#s-f-Description
The others are probably bugs then. Do you have a list to name and
shame?
Ahh- shame on my first for missing this. ;-)
For a quick shot I used:
grep -B13 -A1 ^ [^
On Sun, 2008-02-17 at 09:17:44 +, Simon Huggins wrote:
On Sun, Feb 17, 2008 at 09:22:17AM +0100, Andreas Tille wrote:
On the other hand
http://packages.debian.org/sid/ht
is perfectly formatted on the web pages. It seems to be according
to the fact that parts of the
7 matches
Mail list logo
