Santiago Vila writes:
> However:
> I wonder if we really want to do all that in 2017. The staff-writable
> /usr/local for a "sysadmin assistant" was an interesting idea twenty
> years ago. Today, we would give a sysadmin assistant an entire virtual
> machine to play with, and
On 03-Aug-2017, Ben Finney wrote:
> On 01-Aug-2017, Sean Whitton wrote:
> > 1) the patch needs to be rebased against current policy
>
> I'll take care of that in a few days.
I have updated my changes by rebasing onto current ‘master’ (commit
hash ‘06f7d27ac0e6aea9’). The patch is attached to
Source: developers-reference
Version: 3.4.18
Severity: serious
Tags: buster sid
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: qa-ftbfs-20170805 qa-ftbfs
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build on
amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully):
>
Paul Gevers writes:
> It has been a while since the first version of the "Best practices for
> packaging database applications" was drafted by Sean Finney as the
> creator of dbconfig-common. The discussion on the document has died down
> a long time ago, but as the new (since
On Sat, Aug 05, 2017 at 04:22:03PM -0400, gregor herrmann wrote:
> > So, if you want to count votes: I am working in teams (mainly Debian
> > Astro), and I would favour keeping it --
>
> Perfectly fine, thanks for adding your point of view.
>
> (And just to be sure: The proposal is not to
On Sun, Aug 06, 2017 at 08:03:23AM -0700, Sean Whitton wrote:
> control: retitle -1 Transitioning perms of /usr/local
>
> Hello Santiago,
>
> The TC decision in #484841 is not yet reflected in Policy.
>
> We could close the bug by simply dropping the requirement that
> /usr/local be
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> severity 776557 wishlist
Bug #776557 [debian-policy] Less ambiguous guidance on Priority: important
Severity set to 'wishlist' from 'normal'
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
--
776557:
On Fri, Aug 04, 2017 at 03:42:34PM -0400, Sean Whitton wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 03, 2017 at 03:43:56PM +, Mike Gabriel wrote:
> > I am not saying that the build target must not be empty. I can be empty but
> > the build-a ... build-n dependecies have to be moved away from the binary
> > target and
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> block 684126 with 316521
Bug #684126 [debian-policy] debian-policy: clarification needed for handling of
directories used by maintainer scripts
684126 was not blocked by any bugs.
684126 was not blocking any bugs.
Added blocking bug(s) of
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> tags 630174 + patch
Bug #630174 [debian-policy] debian-policy: forbid installation into /lib64
Added tag(s) patch.
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
--
630174:
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> retitle 790949 Restarting daemons when thier plugins change
Bug #790949 [debian-policy] conditional-restart from postinst and related
scripts of plugin packages
Changed Bug title to 'Restarting daemons when thier plugins change' from
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> severity 299007 normal
Bug #299007 [debian-policy] Transitioning perms of /usr/local
Bug #538392 [debian-policy] Transitioning perms of /usr/local
Severity set to 'normal' from 'wishlist'
Severity set to 'normal' from 'wishlist'
> thanks
Stopping
Processing control commands:
> retitle -1 Transitioning perms of /usr/local
Bug #299007 [debian-policy] base-files: Insecure PATH in /root/.profile
Bug #538392 [debian-policy] Should /usr/local be writable by group staff?
Changed Bug title to 'Transitioning perms of /usr/local' from 'base-files:
control: retitle -1 Transitioning perms of /usr/local
Hello Santiago,
The TC decision in #484841 is not yet reflected in Policy.
We could close the bug by simply dropping the requirement that
/usr/local be group-writeable by staff, but Russ says that you would
like your transition plan to be
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> retitle 870899 devref: priority:extra is deprecated, please stops suggesting
> it
Bug #870899 [developers-reference] devref: priority:extra is deprecated, please
stops uggesting it
Changed Bug title to 'devref: priority:extra is deprecated,
Package: debian-policy
Version: 4.0.1.0
Severity: normal
Hi,
In 5.6.30. Testsuite
...
Currently, the only defined value is autopkgtest.
Which is not true, because we have autodep8. Look to:
https://anonscm.debian.org/git/lintian/lintian.git/tree/checks/testsuite.pm#n60
And if you want to use
On Tue, 2017-08-01 at 19:10:36 -0400, Sean Whitton wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 02, 2017 at 12:54:15AM +0200, Guillem Jover wrote:
> > Except for the last dpkg which should probably be dpkg-source, I do
> > like this version better.
> >
> > Also perhaps worth mentioning that dpkg-source will remove the
Package: developers-reference
Starting with Policy 4.0.1 the Priority:extra is deprecated.
https://browse.dgit.debian.org/debian-policy.git/commit/?id=4b3e61ac3fa06d8b82433e09a76f42a4f8859306
Therefore, please stop recommending/suggesting it in devref §6.7.7 (best
practices for transitional
18 matches
Mail list logo