Hello there.
I found, that package rtpg-www modifies /etc/hosts on installation/purge
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=608451
I thing this violate 10.7.4
"The maintainer scripts must not alter a conffile of any package,
including the one the scripts belong to."
But maintainer
Alexander GQ Gerasiov writes:
> I found, that package rtpg-www modifies /etc/hosts on installation/purge
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=608451
> I thing this violate 10.7.4
> "The maintainer scripts must not alter a conffile of any package,
> including the one the scripts b
On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 11:15:57 +0300, Alexander GQ Gerasiov wrote:
> Hello there.
>
> I found, that package rtpg-www modifies /etc/hosts on installation/purge
>
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=608451
>
> I thing this violate 10.7.4
>
> "The maintainer scripts must not alte
Russ Allbery writes:
> For reference for others reading this, the postinst of the relevant
> package follows. Note that it adds an unqualified hostname, potentially
> shadowing a system in the local domain, if the user agrees to update
> /etc/hosts. The debconf question is priority: high and de
AGG> But maintainer disagrees with me arguing that preinst asks user, and
AGG> that's user who modify /etc/hosts (using preinst, eah).
This action is done only if user afrees.
There are a lot packages which do this.
Policy says:
The maintainer scripts must not alter a conffile of *any* package,
TAGG> so for example samba
smb.conf isn't conffile, too,
sorry for mistake
--
... mpd playing: WASP - The Horror
. ''`. Dmitry E. Oboukhov
: :’ : email: un...@debian.org jabber://un...@uvw.ru
`. `~’ GPGKey: 1024D / F8E26537 2006-11-21
`- 1B23 D
Hi,
recent versions of mutt convert attachments to their declared charset
when saving them to disk (bug#537061). In particular, this means that a
file with non-ascii characters, but wrongly sent with charset=us-ascii,
would be converted to ascii on saving, replacing all non-ascii
characters with
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Fladischer Michael
* Package name: useragent-switcher
Version : 0.7.3
Upstream Author : Chris Pederick
* URL : http://chrispederick.com/work/user-agent-switcher/
* License : GPL
Programming Lang: JavaScript, XUL
Descr
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Fladischer Michael
* Package name: server-spy
Version : 0.2.1
Upstream Author : Christophe Jacquet
* URL : http://www.jacquet80.eu/mozilla/exts/ServerSpy/
* License : MPL-1.1 or GPL-2 or LGPL-2.1
Programming Lang: Java
Hi,
I was just having a look at the diff for your upload of
pdf-presenter-console 1.1.1+git.02dfcf-3, fixing #609608, to check if it
was suitable for unblocking for squeeze.
Firstly, thanks for fixing the bug so quickly. Unfortunately, the upload
included a couple of other changes which aren't r
Gah, that was intended for debian-release, not debian-devel; please direct
follow-ups to -release.
On Tue, January 11, 2011 13:18, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I was just having a look at the diff for your upload of
> pdf-presenter-console 1.1.1+git.02dfcf-3, fixing #609608, to check if it
>
Hi,
On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 12:44:43AM +0100, Vincent Danjean wrote:
> On 10/01/2011 22:52, Frank Küster wrote:
> > Osamu Aoki wrote:
> >
> >> 3. Historic/Upstream choice (?): /usr/share/doc/texmf
> >>(Several TeX packages uses this.)
> >
> > That's old-fashioned (or, well, obsolete).
> >
Le mardi 11 janvier 2011 à 09:49 +0100, Julien Cristau a écrit :
> > "The maintainer scripts must not alter a conffile of any package,
> > including the one the scripts belong to."
> >
> /etc/hosts is not a conffile, so it doesn't violate that part.
>
> However, the squeeze RC policy says [1]
>
On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 12:04:15PM +0100, Fladischer Michael wrote:
> Package: wnpp
> Severity: wishlist
> Owner: Fladischer Michael
>
> * Package name: useragent-switcher
Please see the existing bug #522243 for this package, and also #569961
where Daniel Baumann seems to have prepared packa
Josselin Mouette writes:
> On a different, although similar issue, how would a change
> of /etc/inittab in a maintainer script be regarded?
> (I’m considering it for gdm3 in wheezy.)
If I wanted some random package maintainer to mess with my configuration
files, then I would probably just have u
Le mardi 11 janvier 2011 à 18:27 +0100, Bjørn Mork a écrit :
> If I wanted some random package maintainer to mess with my configuration
> files, then I would probably just have used Fedora or whatever.
I am not seeking the opinion of other random developers - I’m sure there
are people who won’t ag
Hi Joss,
what change do you have in mind for /etc/inittab?
cheers,
Holger
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Josselin Mouette writes:
> On a different, although similar issue, how would a change of
> /etc/inittab in a maintainer script be regarded? (I’m considering it
> for gdm3 in wheezy.)
Policy indicates that if other packages should be able to modify
/etc/inittab, sysvinit should provide a script
Quoting Julien Cristau (jcris...@debian.org):
> Hi,
>
> recent versions of mutt convert attachments to their declared charset
> when saving them to disk (bug#537061). In particular, this means that a
> file with non-ascii characters, but wrongly sent with charset=us-ascii,
> would be converted to
Quoting Julien Cristau (jcris...@debian.org):
> bindgraph 0.2a-5.1 fr.po
>
> Jose Luis Tallon
>bindgraph
This one is a false positive: the French translation has a double
question mark, which is "only" a typo of the translator and therefore
doesn't deserve a fixed upload.
(guess who is th
Josselin Mouette writes:
> Le mardi 11 janvier 2011 à 18:27 +0100, Bjørn Mork a écrit :
>> If I wanted some random package maintainer to mess with my configuration
>> files, then I would probably just have used Fedora or whatever.
>
> I am not seeking the opinion of other random developers - I’m
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Al Nikolov
* Package name: drupal6-mod-statistics-advanced
Version : 2.3
Upstream Author : Rodrigo Severo (http://drupal.org/user/496564)
* URL : http://drupal.org/project/statistics_advanced
* License : GPL
Programmin
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Al Nikolov
* Package name: drupal6-mod-browscap
Version : 1.1
Upstream Author : Mike Ryan (http://drupal.org/user/4420)
* URL : http://drupal.org/project/browscap
* License : GPL
Programming Lang: PHP
Description
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Al Nikolov
* Package name: drupal6-mod-mobile-tools
Version : 2.1
Upstream Author : Tom Deryckere (http://drupal.org/user/25564)
* URL : http://drupal.org/project/mobile_tools
* License : GPL
Programming Lang: PHP
De
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Marco Nenciarini
* Package name: repmgr
Version : 1.0.0
Upstream Author : 2ndQuadrant
* URL : http://projects.2ndquadrant.com/repmgr
* License : GPL-3
Programming Lang: C
Description : PostgreSQL replication mana
Policy § 2.5 [0] states packages must not depend on other packages with
lower priority values. In order to better adhere to it, FTP Team
recently implemented a new tool that generates a list of override
disparities[1] daily.
We export a yaml-formatted list, limited to the affected packages only,
w
I've noticed a trend lately that I am often asked to forward the bugs I
report to the Debian BTS upstream, either by the maintainers or
automatically by a bug script. I believe, and I continue to believe,
that maintainers should forward bugs upstream instead of requiring (or
strongly encouraging)
On Tue, 2011-01-11 at 23:54 +, brian m. carlson wrote:
> I've noticed a trend lately that I am often asked to forward the bugs I
> report to the Debian BTS upstream, either by the maintainers or
> automatically by a bug script. I believe, and I continue to believe,
> that maintainers should fo
Ben Hutchings (12/01/2011):
> If a bug is not readily reproducible or isolatable, it may be
> necessary to pass it over to an upstream maintainer who will know
> what further questions to ask. But they need to send those
> questions to the user, not to the Debian maintainer. In the kernel
> team
"brian m. carlson" writes:
> I've noticed a trend lately that I am often asked to forward the bugs
> I report to the Debian BTS upstream, either by the maintainers or
> automatically by a bug script. I believe, and I continue to believe,
> that maintainers should forward bugs upstream instead of
Quoth Cyril Brulebois , on 2011-01-12 01:59:03 +0100:
> > If a bug is not readily reproducible or isolatable, it may be
> > necessary to pass it over to an upstream maintainer who will know
> > what further questions to ask. But they need to send those
> > questions to the user, not to the Debian
On Tue, 2011-01-11 at 18:29 -0700, Drake Wilson wrote:
> Quoth Cyril Brulebois , on 2011-01-12 01:59:03 +0100:
> > > If a bug is not readily reproducible or isolatable, it may be
> > > necessary to pass it over to an upstream maintainer who will know
> > > what further questions to ask. But they n
Regarding
W: Failed to fetch
http://emacs.orebokech.com/dists/sid/main/binary-i386/Packages.gz 404 Not
Found
> "RF" == Romain Francoise writes:
RF> Either build from source yourself, or go back to Emacs 23.
Holy moly. My .emacs file has evolved greatly since emacs 23 using your
emacs 24 s
On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 9:29 AM, Drake Wilson wrote:
> Which upstream bug trackers, if any, would make the above not work?
Sourceforge and probably Gforge/FusionForge trackers.
The only tracker I'm aware of which would work is Trac, some instances
of which allow anyone to put in anyone else's e
(Woopsy, forgot to send to the list the first time.)
Quoth Paul Wise , on 2011-01-12 10:55:34 +0800:
[among other responses]
> Sourceforge and probably Gforge/FusionForge trackers.
>
> The only tracker I'm aware of which would work is Trac, some instances
> of which allow anyone to put in anyone
On 01/11/2011 05:54 PM, brian m. carlson wrote:
I've noticed a trend lately that I am often asked to forward the bugs I
report to the Debian BTS upstream, either by the maintainers or
automatically by a bug script. I believe, and I continue to believe,
that maintainers should forward bugs upstre
John Goerzen writes:
> Now, here's how it proceeds if I have to forward a bug upstream for
> Bacula, which uses Mantis. Creating a Mantis account takes 30
> seconds
I don't know Brian's position on this, but “time to create an account
with arbitrary upstream BTS” isn't the issue.
“Having an ac
On 12 January 2011 14:15, John Goerzen wrote:
> 8) This continues.
For what it is worth, I generally will ask the submitter to use the
upstream bug tracking system if there is any dispute or problems with
the bug report. Sure, this isn't ideal, but seems to me to be a
compromise between getting t
> I understand that maintainers' time is limited and that forwarding bugs
> is not an enjoyable task. But I also understand that having a BTS
> account for the upstream BTS of each of the 2405 packages I have
> installed on my laptop (not to mention my other machines) is simply not
> practical. I
Quoting Christian PERRIER (bubu...@debian.org):
> Many of these packages errors are direct or indirect consequences of
> my l10n work during the lenny-squeeze release cycle.
>
> Direct when the last uploaded version is an NMU of mine..
>
> Indirect when a maintainer uploaded after I prodded him|
Dear Customer,
Curiga pasangan anda selingkuh ?
Ingin mengawasi anak dari pergaulan bebas ?
Ingin mengawasi karyawan anda dari praktik KKN ?
Ingin melacak keberadaan HP anda yg hilang ?
Kami dapat memberikan solusi nya.
Jual Software Penyadap Handphone GSM dengan berbagai macam fitur, antar
41 matches
Mail list logo
