Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> immo vero scripsit:
> So, each header line is logically a single line, phisically it
> may be broken into multiple lines with leading spaces.
>
> I agree that either policy needs to be clarified, or changed.
>
> If the consensus is to chang
At (time_t)1021654369 Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> So, each header line is logically a single line, phisically it
> may be broken into multiple lines with leading spaces.
If policy should be changed to allow this for all fields, it may
make sense to simply defer to RFC 822.
-John Daily
[EMAI
>>"Junichi" == Junichi Uekawa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Junichi> In my reading of policy, policy doesn't currently allow it.
Junichi> Either those packages need to be fixed, or
Junichi> policy. I don't think 2% of packages not following policy
Junichi> should be enough to change policy, co
On Fri, May 17, 2002 at 11:18:55AM -0500, "John R. Daily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
was heard to say:
> > In my reading of policy, policy doesn't currently allow it.
> > Either those packages need to be fixed, or
> > policy. I don't think 2% of packages not following policy
> > should be enough to chan
At (time_t)1021649088 Junichi Uekawa wrote:
> In my reading of policy, policy doesn't currently allow it.
> Either those packages need to be fixed, or
> policy. I don't think 2% of packages not following policy
> should be enough to change policy, considering the usefulness
> of simple tools like
Wichert Akkerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> immo vero scripsit:
> > I still find it useful to grep and sed the Packages file. I don't
> > see any advantage in allowing multi-line fields that would compensate
> > for that.
>
> FWIW, dpkg does allow it. Debian policy is free to not allow it of
> course.
Previously Richard Braakman wrote:
> I still find it useful to grep and sed the Packages file. I don't
> see any advantage in allowing multi-line fields that would compensate
> for that.
FWIW, dpkg does allow it. Debian policy is free to not allow it of
course.
Wichert.
--
__
There's seemingly a broader issue here, too. I've come across an
entry in Sources (vlc) which swaps the version and architecture
components in a build-dep line:
Build-Depends: debhelper (>=2.2.0),
xlibs-dev,
...
libasound2-dev [alpha arm hppa i386 ia64
On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 10:28:07PM +0900, Junichi Uekawa wrote:
> I think the restriction existed because there were tools that
> didn't support te line breaks.
I still find it useful to grep and sed the Packages file. I don't
see any advantage in allowing multi-line fields that would compensate
"John R. Daily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> immo vero scripsit:
> According to section 3.1 of Policy:
>
> Except where otherwise stated only a single line of data is
> allowed and whitespace is not significant in a field
> body.
>
> Section 7.1, which describes the syntax for relationship fields,
> does
There are 39 packages in the May 11 Sources file for woody that
have the Build-Depends field broken out onto multiple lines.
According to section 3.1 of Policy:
Except where otherwise stated only a single line of data is
allowed and whitespace is not significant in a field
body.
Section 7.1, whi
11 matches
Mail list logo
