 |
|
 |
|
Next: Accepted libfreemarker-java 2.3.10-6 (source all)
|
| Author |
Message |
External

Since: Nov 18, 2006 Posts: 85
|
(Msg. 1) Posted: Sat Nov 17, 2007 4:10 pm
Post subject: Request for review: Debian Reference v2 Archived from groups: linux>debian>doc (more info?)
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |  |
External

Since: Nov 18, 2006 Posts: 85
|
(Msg. 2) Posted: Wed Nov 21, 2007 11:47 am
Post subject: Re: Request for review: Debian Reference v2 [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
Hi,
I understand these categorization words are confusing and sometimes used
inconsistently in daily conversation. I think I am folowing traditional
and more official wording as much as possible.
On Tue, Nov 20, 2007 at 08:52:12PM +0200, Andrei Popescu wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 20, 2007 at 08:44:37PM +0200, Andrei Popescu wrote:
> > On Sun, Nov 18, 2007 at 05:47:32AM +0900, Osamu Aoki wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > As has been repeatedly pointed out, Debian reference was getting old.
> > > It needed major rewrite. I finally got the initial draft of Debian
> > > Reference v2 ready.
> > >
> > > Please give me your feed back.
> >
> > In section "Package management" you use 'component' instead of
> > 'section'
>
> ... when you talk about main/contrib/non-free (too much beer)
What is wrong with this? I only see this way of use of words as shown below.
> See "Social Contract":
>
> Social Contract with the Free Software Community
>
> 1. Debian will remain 100% free
>
> We provide the guidelines that we use to determine if a work is free in
> the document entitled The Debian Free Software Guidelines. We promise that the
> Debian system and all its components will be free according to these
> guidelines. We will support people who create or use both free and non-free
> works on Debian. We will never make the system require the use of a non-free
> component.
Also in apt_preference(5)
> the Component: line
> names the licensing component associated with the packages in the
> directory tree of the Release file. For example, the line
> "Component: main" specifies that all the packages in the directory
> tree are from the main component, which entails that they are
> licensed under terms listed in the Debian Free Software Guidelines.
> Specifying this component in the APT preferences file would require
> the line:
>
> Pin: release c=main
Also Debian tutorial: 14.3.1 Configuring Apt
http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/debian-tutorial/ch-dpkg.html#s-dpkg-apt
Also similar description in apt repository howto.
http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/repository-howto/repository-howto.en.html
While for section, it is used for perl and utils:
Debian Policy define: http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-archive.html
> 2.4 Sections
>
> The packages in the categories main, contrib and non-free are grouped further into sections to simplify handling.
>
> The category and section for each package should be specified in the
> package's Section control record (see Section, Section 5.6.5). However,
> the maintainer of the Debian archive may override this selection to
> ensure the consistency of the Debian distribution. The Section field
> should be of the form:
>
> * section if the package is in the main category,
> * segment/section if the package is in the contrib or non-free distribution areas.
>
> The Debian archive maintainers provide the authoritative list of
> sections. At present, they are: admin, base, comm, contrib, devel, doc,
> editors, electronics, embedded, games, gnome, graphics, hamradio,
> interpreters, kde, libs, libdevel, mail, math, misc, net, news,
> non-free, oldlibs, otherosfs, perl, python, science, shells, sound, tex,
> text, utils, web, x11.
Osamu
PS: As for flavour, I know some people call it release. But that is
confusiong with stable release etc. I describe alternative for flavour
as suites.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-doc-REQUEST DeleteThis @lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster DeleteThis @lists.debian.org |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |  |
External

Since: Nov 18, 2006 Posts: 85
|
(Msg. 3) Posted: Wed Nov 21, 2007 12:47 pm
Post subject: Re: Request for review: Debian Reference v2 [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
Second thought:
On Thu, Nov 22, 2007 at 01:44:13AM +0900, Osamu Aoki wrote:
> > The Debian archive maintainers provide the authoritative list of
> > sections. At present, they are: admin, base, comm, contrib, devel, doc,
^^^^^^^
> > editors, electronics, embedded, games, gnome, graphics, hamradio,
> > interpreters, kde, libs, libdevel, mail, math, misc, net, news,
> > non-free, oldlibs, otherosfs, perl, python, science, shells, sound, tex,
^^^^^^^^
> > text, utils, web, x11.
I think these mix of word usage came from archive structure history.
Anyway, I do not want to get too deep into these confusing situation.
See wiki page for my updated text.
Osamu
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-doc-REQUEST DeleteThis @lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster DeleteThis @lists.debian.org |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |  |
|
You can post new topics in this forum You can reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|