Cosimo Alfarano wrote:
> * Closes:#
> What about the syntax?
One good way for Emacs users to always get the syntax right is to
use debian-changelog-mode.el and font-locking. The `close' bit
will be fontified when you've got the syntax right.
(Hmmm. It should have a menu entry for that too
Cosimo Alfarano wrote:
> * Closes:#
> What about the syntax?
One good way for Emacs users to always get the syntax right is to
use debian-changelog-mode.el and font-locking. The `close' bit
will be fontified when you've got the syntax right.
(Hmmm. It should have a menu entry for that to
On Tue, Aug 29, 2000 at 09:43:16PM +0200, Cosimo Alfarano wrote:
> So what's the best way to write a changelog?
Something like:
* debsign checks to see whether the .dsc file has already been signed
(closes: #54963)
Then the reader knows what has been done and dinstall knows which bug
repor
On Tue, 29 Aug 2000, Cosimo Alfarano wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 28, 2000 at 03:30:06PM -0400, Ben Collins wrote:
>
> EHLO,
> I post this msg here from -devel for a nm dubt.
>
> > > ld.so.preload-manager (0.3.2-2) unstable; urgency=low
> > > .
> > >* Closes:#70398
> > I've noticed sort of a trend
Cosimo Alfarano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>from wnpp doc I read:
>
>***
>Of course, the easiest way of closing bugs is to include the appropiate
>entry on the changelog and append '(Closes: bug#n)' to it. In this
>way, the bug will be closed at the time the new package gets installed
>into the
On Tue, Aug 29, 2000 at 09:43:16PM +0200, Cosimo Alfarano wrote:
> > > ld.so.preload-manager (0.3.2-2) unstable; urgency=low
> > > .
> > >* Closes:#70398
> > I've noticed sort of a trend here lately. Changelog entries are getting
> > more and more ambiguous. Can this stop please? Descriptions
On Tue, Aug 29, 2000 at 09:43:16PM +0200, Cosimo Alfarano wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 28, 2000 at 03:30:06PM -0400, Ben Collins wrote:
>
> EHLO,
> I post this msg here from -devel for a nm dubt.
>
> > > ld.so.preload-manager (0.3.2-2) unstable; urgency=low
> > > .
> > >* Closes:#70398
> > I've not
On Mon, Aug 28, 2000 at 03:30:06PM -0400, Ben Collins wrote:
EHLO,
I post this msg here from -devel for a nm dubt.
> > ld.so.preload-manager (0.3.2-2) unstable; urgency=low
> > .
> >* Closes:#70398
> I've noticed sort of a trend here lately. Changelog entries are getting
> more and more amb
Roger Burton West wrote:
> I haven't yet seen anyone editing XML with anything except a graphical
> tool (text-editor plus fancy bits, usually).
FWIW, I write large documents in xml using vi.
> I certainly find it easier to write with spaces-and-line-breaks than
> to use XML.
The two are hardly
On Tue, Aug 29, 2000 at 09:43:16PM +0200, Cosimo Alfarano wrote:
> So what's the best way to write a changelog?
Something like:
* debsign checks to see whether the .dsc file has already been signed
(closes: #54963)
Then the reader knows what has been done and dinstall knows which bug
repo
On Tue, 29 Aug 2000, Cosimo Alfarano wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 28, 2000 at 03:30:06PM -0400, Ben Collins wrote:
>
> EHLO,
> I post this msg here from -devel for a nm dubt.
>
> > > ld.so.preload-manager (0.3.2-2) unstable; urgency=low
> > > .
> > >* Closes:#70398
> > I've noticed sort of a tren
Cosimo Alfarano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>from wnpp doc I read:
>
>***
>Of course, the easiest way of closing bugs is to include the appropiate
>entry on the changelog and append '(Closes: bug#n)' to it. In this
>way, the bug will be closed at the time the new package gets installed
>into th
On Tue, Aug 29, 2000 at 09:43:16PM +0200, Cosimo Alfarano wrote:
> > > ld.so.preload-manager (0.3.2-2) unstable; urgency=low
> > > .
> > >* Closes:#70398
> > I've noticed sort of a trend here lately. Changelog entries are getting
> > more and more ambiguous. Can this stop please? Description
On Tue, Aug 29, 2000 at 09:43:16PM +0200, Cosimo Alfarano wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 28, 2000 at 03:30:06PM -0400, Ben Collins wrote:
>
> EHLO,
> I post this msg here from -devel for a nm dubt.
>
> > > ld.so.preload-manager (0.3.2-2) unstable; urgency=low
> > > .
> > >* Closes:#70398
> > I've no
On Mon, Aug 28, 2000 at 03:30:06PM -0400, Ben Collins wrote:
EHLO,
I post this msg here from -devel for a nm dubt.
> > ld.so.preload-manager (0.3.2-2) unstable; urgency=low
> > .
> >* Closes:#70398
> I've noticed sort of a trend here lately. Changelog entries are getting
> more and more am
Roger Burton West wrote:
> I haven't yet seen anyone editing XML with anything except a graphical
> tool (text-editor plus fancy bits, usually).
FWIW, I write large documents in xml using vi.
> I certainly find it easier to write with spaces-and-line-breaks than
> to use XML.
The two are hardly
On Tue, Aug 29, 2000 at 02:00:15PM -0400, Buddha Buck wrote:
>At 06:55 PM 8/29/00 +0100, Roger Burton West wrote:
>>IMHO one of the biggest advantages of Unix is that configuration files
>>are plain text
>Is that a pro or a con for use of XML? Since XML is a way of structuring
>plain text, and
At 06:55 PM 8/29/00 +0100, Roger Burton West wrote:
On Tue, Aug 29, 2000 at 12:55:21AM -0400, Jeremy T. Bouse wrote:
> I'm curious to find some differeing opinions pro/con use of XML for
>configuration files...
IMHO one of the biggest advantages of Unix is that configuration files
are plai
On Tue, Aug 29, 2000 at 12:55:21AM -0400, Jeremy T. Bouse wrote:
> I'm curious to find some differeing opinions pro/con use of XML for
>configuration files...
IMHO one of the biggest advantages of Unix is that configuration files
are plain text and can be edited with vi on a console attached
On Tue, Aug 29, 2000 at 02:00:15PM -0400, Buddha Buck wrote:
>At 06:55 PM 8/29/00 +0100, Roger Burton West wrote:
>>IMHO one of the biggest advantages of Unix is that configuration files
>>are plain text
>Is that a pro or a con for use of XML? Since XML is a way of structuring
>plain text, an
At 06:55 PM 8/29/00 +0100, Roger Burton West wrote:
>On Tue, Aug 29, 2000 at 12:55:21AM -0400, Jeremy T. Bouse wrote:
> > I'm curious to find some differeing opinions pro/con use of XML for
> >configuration files...
>
>IMHO one of the biggest advantages of Unix is that configuration files
>a
On Tue, Aug 29, 2000 at 12:55:21AM -0400, Jeremy T. Bouse wrote:
> I'm curious to find some differeing opinions pro/con use of XML for
>configuration files...
IMHO one of the biggest advantages of Unix is that configuration files
are plain text and can be edited with vi on a console attache
"Jeremy T. Bouse" wrote:
> I'm curious to find some differeing opinions pro/con use of XML for
> configuration files...
Pro: nice hierarchical structure, very readable, parser available (see below).
Con: Not necessarily easy to edit, larger files.
That's all I can think of.
> also looki
"Jeremy T. Bouse" wrote:
> I'm curious to find some differeing opinions pro/con use of XML for
> configuration files...
Pro: nice hierarchical structure, very readable, parser available (see below).
Con: Not necessarily easy to edit, larger files.
That's all I can think of.
> also look
24 matches
Mail list logo
