-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 29-05-2005 15:44, cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis) wrote:
> On Saturday 28 May 2005 22:25, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
>
>>On 28-05-2005 21:45, cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis) wrote:
>>
>>>I'm currently working on a conversion script (not part of
>>>maintainer-sc
On Saturday 28 May 2005 22:25, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> On 28-05-2005 21:45, cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis) wrote:
> > I'm currently working on a conversion script (not part of
> > maintainer-scripts), that'll migrate path approach to desktop-profiles
>
> You don't like my cfengine script? I wrote it
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 28-05-2005 21:45, cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis) wrote:
> I'm currently working on a conversion script (not part of
> maintainer-scripts), that'll migrate path approach to desktop-profiles
You don't like my cfengine script? I wrote it specifically fo
I'm currently working on a conversion script (not part of
maintainer-scripts), that'll migrate path approach to desktop-profiles
I'm currently unsure about wether to provide a hook through which the admin
can start that script from within the package installation or not.
This bug seams to imply
On Sun, 22 May 2005, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> On 21-05-2005 00:45, cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis) wrote:
> > my hack does nothing in itself, the gconf path file is not being changed
> > behind the admin's back, or on the packages initiative.
> > _The_admin_is_the_acting_party_
>
>
> Please
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 21-05-2005 00:45, cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis) wrote:
> my hack does nothing in itself, the gconf path file is not being changed
> behind the admin's back, or on the packages initiative.
> _The_admin_is_the_acting_party_
Please elaborate o
On Friday 20 May 2005 12:28, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> On 20-05-2005 10:46, cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis) wrote:
> > On Friday 20 May 2005 09:42, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> > was planning on contacting the gconf2 maintainer already (I'll probably
> > get around to that this weekend), I don't expect tha
On Friday 20 May 2005 12:28, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> On 20-05-2005 10:46, cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis) wrote:
> > On Friday 20 May 2005 09:42, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> >> c) Provide your hack only as a "tweak"
> > that's the current situation I think, no?
> No. Your hack replaces the file, ignori
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 20-05-2005 10:46, cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis) wrote:
> On Friday 20 May 2005 09:42, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
>
>>Package: desktop-profiles
>>Version: 1.4.5
>>Severity: serious
>>Justification: Policy 10.7.4
>>
>>The file /etc/gconf2/path is a conffil
On Friday 20 May 2005 09:42, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> Package: desktop-profiles
> Version: 1.4.5
> Severity: serious
> Justification: Policy 10.7.4
>
> The file /etc/gconf2/path is a conffile owned by the package gconf2.
That file is left alone by default on installation of desktop-profiles.
The
Package: desktop-profiles
Version: 1.4.5
Severity: serious
Justification: Policy 10.7.4
The file /etc/gconf2/path is a conffile owned by the package gconf2.
Postinst of desktop-profiles offers through debconf to mess with that
file. That is a violation of Debian Policy section 10.7.4.
I see no
11 matches
Mail list logo
