On 19-Oct-03, 04:20 (CDT), Josip Rodin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But it's a historic injustice,
Help! Help! I'm being repressed!
The Man is keeping me down!
Up with perl, down with make!
Power to the people!
Steve
--
Steve Greenland
The irony is that Bill Gates claims to be making
On 19-Oct-03, 13:03 (CDT), Josip Rodin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, Oct 19, 2003 at 11:50:41AM -0500, Steve Greenland wrote:
But it's a historic injustice,
Help! Help! I'm being repressed!
The Man is keeping me down!
Up with perl, down with make!
Power to the people!
We
on my own.
Steve
--
Steve Greenland
The irony is that Bill Gates claims to be making a stable operating
system and Linus Torvalds claims to be trying to take over the
world. -- seen on the net
--
Steve Greenland
The irony is that Bill Gates claims to be making a stable operating
system and Linus Torvalds claims to be trying to take over the
world. -- seen on the net
is still the most widely known unix documentation interface,
new users may be helped by these pointers.
Colin already volunteered to hack man to provide the pointers instead of
a simple 'manpage not found'.
Next!
Steve
--
Steve Greenland
The irony is that Bill Gates claims to be making
the alleged benefits of ash (small, loads faster on a
slow/small memory machine). Why would I, Debian user, benefit from being
able to run pdksh as /bin/sh? (Remembering that standards compliance, in
and of itself, does not give me a sexual thrill.)
Steve
--
Steve Greenland
The irony is that Bill
names, and it's much better to match
that, so that when documents say build jfsutils then Debian users
can just translate to apt-get install jfsutils.
Manoj, AJ: See? I don't think everything needs to be in policy :-)
Steve
--
Steve Greenland
The irony is that Bill Gates claims to be making
.
What is the purpose of Debian Policy? I always thought it was a way to
decide/document choices, when more than one choice was reasonable, and
when that choice affected other developers and our users. This subject
falls into that definition, in my opinion.
Steve
--
Steve Greenland
The irony
On 16-Jun-02, 15:30 (CDT), Chris Waters [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, Jun 16, 2002 at 02:17:12PM -0500, Steve Greenland wrote:
It's not superfluous: if it's up to the developer, then they can move a
binary from one to the other with no warning or discussion.
Not if that binary has
--
Steve Greenland
The irony is that Bill Gates claims to be making a stable operating
system and Linus Torvalds claims to be trying to take over the
world. -- seen on the net
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL
, as one can always work around any particular missing
tool (or, if not, then we need to make sure that tool gets moved).
Steve
--
Steve Greenland
The irony is that Bill Gates claims to be making a stable operating
system and Linus Torvalds claims to be trying to take over the
world
, but something on the order of Hey, I need a place to
put this extra perl script, hmmm, /usr/lib/perl5 looks good!
Steve
--
Steve Greenland
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
,
but it was not completely clear to me.
--
Steve Greenland
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 24-Dec-01, 07:14 (CST), Ben Armstrong [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Please CC me on all replies as I am not subscribed to this list.
In Debian Policy 3.5.6.0 section 10.2.1 it says:
Packages other than base-passwd must not modify /etc/passwd,
/etc/shadow, /etc/group or /etc/gshadow.
, although
not the proposal.
--
Steve Greenland [EMAIL PROTECTED]
.
While I share your pain, it's not a policy issue, but should go into the
Developers Guide when that gets redone.
Steve
--
Steve Greenland [EMAIL PROTECTED]
particular options/features/chunks of the package they would choose.
Steve
--
Steve Greenland [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 06-Sep-01, 06:59 (CDT), Herbert Xu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
BTW, what is it with all the Steves in this thread? :)
Is your problem that there are so many of us, or that we seem to be
excessively dim? I personally blame insufficient caffiene...
Steve Greenland
(No offense intended to Mr
On 05-Sep-01, 16:52 (CDT), Herbert Xu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Vociferous Mole [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So? Isn't it a bug? This isn't a case of a policy change creating a bug,
but of a existing bug being highlighted by the policy clarification.
It doesn't break anything, so it's not a
On 31-Aug-01, 16:22 (CDT), Santiago Vila [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Let's consider the following proposal:
The GPL file in base-files should better be renamed to GPL-2 and
GPL should be a symlink pointing to it.
[ The proposal is independent of whatever step may come afterwards if/once
On 31-Aug-01, 10:43 (CDT), Santiago Vila [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 31 Aug 2001, Andrew McMillan wrote:
To make it happen you should file a wishlist bug against the package which
provides the GPL, asking it to provide it as a versioned file and symlink
/usr/share/common-licenses/GPL
On 30-Aug-01, 03:12 (CDT), Ari Makela [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't like the idea of licencing my software under a licence I
cannot know because it doesn't even exist so I tend to use GPL version
2.
So should I just ignore the error message or should there be file
On 22-Aug-01, 12:30 (CDT), Branden Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I find this assertion in tension with the one you make later that the
one line description should be targetted at people who _don't_ have any
idea what the package is. Why would such people know what HTTP
stands for?
I
the word except between specifications and in.
And protocol is misspelled.
Steve
[1] With the possible exception of the should be less than 80
characters clause.
--
Steve Greenland [EMAIL PROTECTED]
severity 100631 normal
retitle 100631 [AMMENDMENT 28/06/2001] Restrict http access to /usr/share/doc
bye
This proposal has two seconds and no ammendments. Since it has generated
no controversy, I'm setting the discussion period of 10 days, which will
end on 8 July 2001.
Thanks,
Steve
--
Steve
On 26-Jun-01, 23:02 (CDT), Rene Weber [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Do we really mean must for FHS compatibility if we are advocating
ignoring its directives for the sbin directories?
Will you *please* stop harping on this? A substantial percentage of us
think we *are* following the FHS w.r.t.
On 27-Jun-01, 07:09 (CDT), Julian Gilbey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Agreed. So should we close this bug report?
Yes, please.
Steve
--
Steve Greenland [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 23-Jun-01, 17:36 (CDT), Julian Gilbey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Jun 22, 2001 at 09:08:10AM -0500, Steve Greenland wrote:
On 21-Jun-01, 17:33 (CDT), Julian Gilbey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Scripts which use programs in a directory other than /usr/bin and
/bin (and /usr/bin/X11
to
be running MacOS, not Linux. Please proceed from here.)
As a particular point, note that if they are not considered standard,
most init.d scripts will have to be modified add them to the path, as
start-stop-daemon is in /sbin.
Steve
--
Steve Greenland [EMAIL PROTECTED]
This note is being sent as part of a project to clean out old ( 1yr)
debian-policy proposals. If you disagree with action below please
respond to [EMAIL PROTECTED], not to me, so that the discussion may
be carried out publically in debian-policy. Feel free to re-open the
bug while it's being
This note is being sent as part of a project to clean out old ( 1yr)
debian-policy proposals. If you disagree with action below please
respond to [EMAIL PROTECTED], not to me, so that the discussion may
be carried out publically in debian-policy. Feel free to re-open the
bug while it's being
This note is being sent as part of a project to clean out old ( 1yr)
debian-policy proposals. If you disagree with action below please
respond to [EMAIL PROTECTED], not to me, so that the discussion may
be carried out publically in debian-policy. Feel free to re-open the
bug while it's being
This note is being sent as part of a project to clean out old ( 1yr)
debian-policy proposals. If you disagree with action below please
respond to [EMAIL PROTECTED], not to me, so that the discussion may
be carried out publically in debian-policy. Feel free to re-open the
bug while it's being
This note is being sent as part of a project to clean out old ( 1yr)
debian-policy proposals. If you disagree with action below please
respond to [EMAIL PROTECTED], not to me, so that the discussion may
be carried out publically in debian-policy. Feel free to re-open the
bug while it's being
This is a summary of the status and disposition of many of the old (
1yr) debian-policy proposals. Only bugs marked as fixed were
considered; they were marked this way because they had been rejected
or hadn't had any action in several months (stalled). If you
disagree with my action, please
software
was probably not a good idea.
I'm asking for seconds.
Steve Greenland
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
...
Steve
--
Steve Greenland [EMAIL PROTECTED]
pgpr7wSSHnhHL.pgp
Description: PGP signature
be the maintainer's
discretion.
One suggestion: I think that last phrase might be better expressed as
...however, the documentation for any single package should use
only one encoding.
Steve
--
Steve Greenland [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Please do not CC me on mail sent to this list; I subscribe
templates != examples. The former are covered by 11.7.3
(penultimate paragraph) , the latter by 13.7.
Steve
--
Steve Greenland [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Please do not CC me on mail sent to this list; I subscribe to and read
every list I post to.)
enough about various encoding to argue one over the other...)
Steve
--
Steve Greenland [EMAIL PROTECTED]
of parsing.
Steve
--
Steve Greenland [EMAIL PROTECTED]
,
and most of those will fix them. Yes, there will be a very few stubborn
idiots left. Deal with it. Life is like that sometimes.
Sheesh.
Steve
--
Steve Greenland [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Please do not CC me on mail sent to this list; I subscribe to and read
every list I post to.)
complied when it
+ was last updated. The current version number is version;.
/p
p
I second this proposal.
--
Steve Greenland [EMAIL PROTECTED]
pgp7401VEp8RX.pgp
Description: PGP signature
, roxen-group), so that one can do apt-cache search
'-group' to find all those meta packages.
--
Steve Greenland [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Please do not CC me on mail sent to this list; I subscribe to and read
every list I post to.)
an ammendent
that clarifies reality, so that Adrian doesn't get mislead again :-).
Steve
--
Steve Greenland [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Please do not CC me on mail sent to this list; I subscribe to and read
every list I post to.)
members. See deb(5). (I suspect that support for signed debs implies
more members, but not a change to the basic format.)
Steve
--
Steve Greenland [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Please do not CC me on mail sent to this list; I subscribe to and read
every list I post to.)
On 01-May-01, 12:19 (CDT), Julian Gilbey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, May 01, 2001 at 11:45:42AM -0500, Steve Greenland wrote:
On 30-Apr-01, 14:33 (CDT), Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
You could probably do without the latter two, but IIRC the deb format
On 24-Apr-01, 05:25 (CDT), Herbert Xu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Steve Greenland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No, I'm suggesting that build-depends could simply have an unversioned
depends on debhelper. The buildds would then always[1] have the latest
version of debhelper[2]. No effort
) that the discussion is not worth pursuing again.
--
Steve Greenland [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Please do not CC me on mail sent to this list; I subscribe to and read
every list I post to.)
actual bugs in debhelper, of course.
--
Steve Greenland [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Please do not CC me on mail sent to this list; I subscribe to and read
every list I post to.)
elsewhere.
As a side note, did anyone else notice that dpkg-dev 1.8.3.1 containes a
completely empty /usr/share/doc/dpkg-dev?
Steve
[1] Well, obviously I can tar it up and move it elsewhere...still
annoying.
--
Steve Greenland [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Please do not CC me on mail sent to this list; I
to the point, we can have violate a MUST == RC Bug (modulo
deliberate maintainer choice with good reason) but there is nothing in
that says converse is true: there are lots of RC bugs that have nothing
to do with policy.
Steve
--
Steve Greenland [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Please do not CC me on mail sent
getting really confused by this whole thing, and I think
that the RFC route is the far better known.
I, for one, like Julian's proposal.
Steve
--
Steve Greenland [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Please do not CC me on mail sent to this list; I subscribe to and read
every list I post to.)
that the NMU'r and the developer didn't accidentally re-use
the same revision number.
Steve
--
Steve Greenland [EMAIL PROTECTED]
for this purpose.
(Note that hardly any of the vt100 compatible terminal emulators are
actually capable of doing a true VT100 terminal, there's lots of obscure
(and rarely used) features, particularly weird keys.)
Steve
--
Steve Greenland [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 27-Mar-01, 23:57 (CST), Anthony Towns aj@azure.humbug.org.au wrote:
On Mon, Mar 26, 2001 at 09:35:36AM -0600, Steve Greenland wrote:
Encouraging I could agree with, particularly when the check could be
automated against the Packages file. But even an automated check against
to provide
a statically linked version? Why can't they go in contrib (DFSG) or
non-free (otherwise) with a dependency on OpenMotif, just like other
non-free library using software?
Steve
--
Steve Greenland [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 27-Mar-01, 12:09 (CST), Branden Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Mar 27, 2001 at 10:56:31AM -0600, Steve Greenland wrote:
If OpenMotif is in the distribution, why do packages need to provide
a statically linked version? Why can't they go in contrib (DFSG) or
non-free (otherwise
an automated check against
the maintainer scripts is not feasible for most people, and a lot of
checks are not possible to automate.
Steve
--
Steve Greenland [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Please do not CC me on mail sent to this list; I subscribe to and read
every list I post to.)
uploaded to both
dists hasn't changed in either dist anyway, so policy compliance won't
*decrease*.
Steve
--
Steve Greenland [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Steve Greenland [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Steve Greenland [EMAIL PROTECTED]
country's laws.
Steve
--
Steve Greenland [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Please do not CC me on mail sent to this list; I subscribe to and read
every list I post to.)
== constraints typo fix.
Steve
--
Steve Greenland [EMAIL PROTECTED]
pgpEOWBLJkWjW.pgp
Description: PGP signature
for the sysvinit package.
Aren't these both superceded by Henrique's invoke-rc.d (#76868)? (Hmmm,
don't see anything from Henrique since late November...)
Steve
--
Steve Greenland [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Please do not CC me on mail sent to this list; I subscribe to and read
every list I post to.)
sense to most of us, but lead to cries
of censorship and cabal from those affected.
No, I don't have a better solution right now, just picking holes.
steve
--
Steve Greenland [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Please do not CC me on mail sent to this list; I subscribe to and read
every list I post to.)
] Of course, reading debian-legal shows that most writers prefer to
make up their own crappy licenses that don't do what they think they do
and usually make things undistributable. Sigh.
--
Steve Greenland [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-* package would include in _its_ documentation
a (brief) discussion of why each package was chosen, and a list of
alternatives.
steve
--
Steve Greenland [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Please do not CC me on mail sent to this list; I subscribe to and read
every list I post to.)
if the package-building tools would
place files in $DEB_BUILD_DIR if it is set. If it isn't, they
will continue their current behavior of dropping them in the
parent directory.
I, for one, would like this feature. I'm vastly confused about why it
would be a policy issue, though.
Steve
--
Steve
On 20-Nov-00, 11:32 (CST), Wichert Akkerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Previously Steve Greenland wrote:
I, for one, would like this feature. I'm vastly confused about why it
would be a policy issue, though.
because it means all debian/rules files need to be changed to replace
of date, and needs to be fixed, but it's
certainly not the same as start.)
Steve
--
Steve Greenland [EMAIL PROTECTED]
there would be a lot more effort to
follow this proposal than just sourcing the file and changing a few
configure commands.
Steve
--
Steve Greenland [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Please do not CC me on mail sent to this list; I subscribe to and read
every list I post to.)
to enable this is something I think should be required (e.g.
if someone files a bug that correctly solves this issue, you either
accept the patch, or leave the bug open at normal severity).
Fair enough.
Steve
--
Steve Greenland [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Please do not CC me on mail sent to this list
On 06-Nov-00, 13:35 (CST), Ben Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Nov 06, 2000 at 10:58:30AM -0600, Steve Greenland wrote:
1. Non-FHS ports. This seems to me a contradiction in terms. Marcus
has weighed in with but HURD *is* FHS, and I don't see why other ports
can't be as well
for now.
Steve
--
Steve Greenland [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Please do not CC me on mail sent to this list; I subscribe to and read
every list I post to.)
or doesn't, but I
only did quick skim of the descriptions), and packages strongly urged to
use it in the postinst, that would be a better solution.
Steve
--
Steve Greenland [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Please do not CC me on mail sent to this list; I subscribe to and read
every list I post to.)
so that other
packages can depend on the presence of a specific function w/o depending
on a specific package.
If you want to provide such a function for the user (show me all the
web browsers), implementing keywords would be a better, more useful
choice.
Steve
--
Steve Greenland [EMAIL
on.)
Someone (IanJ?) had a more detailed proposal for this a while ago, I'll
see if I can dig it out.
Steve
--
Steve Greenland [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Please do not CC me on mail sent to this list; I subscribe to and read
every list I post to.)
preprocessor that creates Postscript output
postscript-viewer Anything that can display Postscript files
Of what possible use are the -preview virtual packages? What would
depend on any prepreprocessor that creates {PDF,PS} output?
Steve
--
Steve Greenland [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 09-Oct-00, 13:57 (CDT), Anthony Towns aj@azure.humbug.org.au wrote:
On Mon, Oct 09, 2000 at 12:13:47PM -0500, Steve Greenland wrote:
preferred: The Debian preferred implementation of a common service that
has multiple implementations (e.g. webservers, SMTP, mp3 players, etc
.
Hmm. Don't we all have task-debian-dev installed?
I suspect a good many of us don't have *any* task-* packages installed,
esp. if our initial install predates the task packages. Once one has a
nicely set up system, why would I mess with the task packages?
Steve
--
Steve Greenland [EMAIL
that should be listed
everywhere that that build-depends is mentioned.
/rant
Why are people determined to make information so hard to find?
Steve
--
Steve Greenland [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Please do not CC me on mail sent to this list; I subscribe to and read
every list I post to.)
On 23-Aug-00, 18:17 (CDT), Daniel Barclay [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From: Steve Greenland [EMAIL PROTECTED]
... Current policy
requires that /usr/doc/package exist (possibly as a symlink to
/usr/share/doc/package).
Then why don't more package implement that policy?
Because they're
On 22-Aug-00, 23:12 (CDT), Daniel Barclay [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Some packages don't have a documentation directory at all.
Then they are in violation of the Debian policy. Current policy
requires that /usr/doc/package exist (possibly as a symlink to
/usr/share/doc/package).
Some others do
On 22-Aug-00, 23:53 (CDT), Nicol?s Lichtmaier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What about the /usr/doc/foo
symlink -- is foo-doc going to take care of that? What if I later
install foo? Who gets to remove the link?
I don't know, but this kludge is a secondary thing, and should not be
On 20-Aug-00, 15:24 (CDT), Ben Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The nostrip check needs to be inside the debug check. Because of you are
not compiling with debugging turned on, there's no reason to not strip the
binaries. So (note, the blank should go first):
ifneq $(findstring
On 23-Aug-00, 16:26 (CDT), Franklin Belew [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Aug 23, 2000 at 02:59:39PM -0500, Steve Greenland wrote:
While I agree with the philosophy, this code snippet is wrong, as
it will add the -s iff DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS includes debug but not
nostrip.
This makes
On 22-Aug-00, 18:27 (CDT), Nicol?s Lichtmaier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
1. I subtly avoided those by specifying doc- rather than -doc :-)
FWIW, I think we ought to come to agreement about the proper behaviour:
right now I don't know *where* to look after installing foo-doc.
Here
On 22-Aug-00, 21:02 (CDT), Nicol?s Lichtmaier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Think this: Do the docs document the docs? /usr/share/doc/mutt documents
mutt, but /usr/share/doc/mutt-doc... documents... what? mutt-doc? Is a
nonsensical place for documentation, I think. It only has some sense from a
On 21-Aug-00, 14:10 (CDT), Nicol?s Lichtmaier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Except that a package named doc-rfc will already have files in
/usr/share/doc/doc-rfc (copyright and so forth), and so having others in
/usr/share/doc/rfc is a little weird and unexpected.
For you. Not for me. And I
On 21-Aug-00, 15:56 (CDT), Nicol?s Lichtmaier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I expect that when I install a package named doc-, all if its
content is going to be in /usr/share/doc/doc-. The Debian standard,
whether spelled out in policy or not, supports such expectation.
That's a
On 04-Jul-00, 18:05 (CDT), Julian Gilbey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So are people happy with changing the wording of the last two lines to
read:
otherwise they must go in non-free.
FWIW, I'm happy with that.
steve greenland
On 02-Jul-00, 23:38 (CDT), Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Specifically, because the files are conffiles, they are not removed
when the package is removed, and so the files stay around to continue
to affect the behavior of emacs. This happened to me with the user-de
and user-es
On 22-Jun-00, 04:09 (CDT), Jordi Mallach [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What I see in /v/l/d/a/editor is the priorities are random now. In my
system,
/bin/ae 20
/usr/bin/joe 70
/usr/bin/nano 40 (I copied from Pico, IIRC)
/usr/bin/vim 20
And I don't think a priority of 70 conforms to any
On 21-Jun-00, 13:17 (CDT), Julian Gilbey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Brock Rozen suggested that init.d scripts should have explicit
PATH=... settings. No-one commented on the idea.
As I recall, there was a lot of discussion...although maybe it occurred
in -devel before Brock formally proposed
On 22-Jun-00, 17:54 (CDT), Jordi Mallach [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Woo, thanks for the info. I tried to find something, but in that message
pool it's difficult.
It wasn't on any of the debian-* lists, just cc'd among the editor
maintainers.
That would be great, but I see a problem if we don't
On 22-Jun-00, 20:15 (CDT), Carl R. Witty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Steve Greenland [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
In fact, I wouldn't mind revisiting the idea that the vi clones should
be ranked much lower. Anybody who want vi is going to type vi; somebody
who is so new to unix that they type
On 17-Jun-00, 22:57 (CDT), Brian Mays [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[wrt content of README.Debian]
Yes, but it should be general information of this type. I think that a
detailed list of changes to the upstream source does not fit in here.
When I see README.Debian, I immediately assume that
On 16-Jun-00, 14:32 (CDT), Brian Mays [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have always considered the copyright file as the place to go when
one needed to determine what has been done to the upstream sources by
the Debian maintainer. (In one sense, it is a summary of the .diff.gz
file). It is
On 23-May-00, 11:32 (CDT), Josip Rodin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, May 24, 2000 at 01:07:12AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
- Packages can and should place scripts in
+ Packages may place scripts in
tt/etc/init.d/tt to start or stop services at boot
1 - 100 of 193 matches
Mail list logo
