On Mon, 2013-05-06 at 17:12 +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
> do we have an estimate (via piuparts ?) on how many packages are
> failing to do that?
piuparts does test for this, some stats:
sid2experimental 23
testing2sid 12
squeeze2wheezy 209
squeeze2bpo2wheezy 36
lenny2squeeze 47
http://anonscm.
Hi!
On Mon, 2013-05-06 at 15:18:04 +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
> In policy section 10.7.3 Behavior, there is this sentence:
>
> Obsolete configuration files without local changes may be
> removed by the package during upgrade.
>
> I would like to suggest that "may" be replaced with "
Le Mon, May 06, 2013 at 03:18:04PM +0800, Paul Wise a écrit :
>
> In policy section 10.7.3 Behavior, there is this sentence:
>
> Obsolete configuration files without local changes may be
> removed by the package during upgrade.
>
> I would like to suggest that "may" be replaced w
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> merge 412668 563601
Bug #412668 [debian-policy] Extend configuration file protection to symlinks
Bug #563601 [debian-policy] debian-policy: discuss symlinks as conffiles
Marked as found in versions debian-policy/3.7.2.2.
Bug #412668 [debian-policy
In policy section 10.7.3 Behavior, there is this sentence:
Obsolete configuration files without local changes may be
removed by the package during upgrade.
I would like to suggest that "may" be replaced with "should".
--
bye,
pabs
http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
signature.asc
5 matches
Mail list logo