[Piuparts-commits] [SCM] piatti.debian.org configuration files branch, piatti, updated. 0.43-15-g9510d05
Andreas Beckmann
debian at abeckmann.de
Tue Jan 31 08:00:16 UTC 2012
The following commit has been merged in the piatti branch:
commit c7dfe9215b80413f5e2c914ed3e9cce27d46914b
Author: Andreas Beckmann <debian at abeckmann.de>
Date: Sat Jan 28 15:40:36 2012 +0100
rewrap templates
rewrap for 72 columns so that I can paste the templates into
$EDITOR started by reportbug without causing more wrapping
Signed-off-by: Andreas Beckmann <debian at abeckmann.de>
diff --git a/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/cronjob_produces_output_after_package_removal.mail b/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/cronjob_produces_output_after_package_removal.mail
index 7459ac1..c6b717d 100644
--- a/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/cronjob_produces_output_after_package_removal.mail
+++ b/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/cronjob_produces_output_after_package_removal.mail
@@ -9,8 +9,8 @@ Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
-during a test with piuparts I noticed your packages cronjob produce output
-after the package has been removed.
+during a test with piuparts I noticed your packages cronjob produces
+output after the package has been removed.
From the attached log (scroll to the bottom...):
diff --git a/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/doesnt_use_invoke-rc.d.mail b/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/doesnt_use_invoke-rc.d.mail
index b972eca..8f461c9 100644
--- a/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/doesnt_use_invoke-rc.d.mail
+++ b/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/doesnt_use_invoke-rc.d.mail
@@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
To: submit at bugs.debian.org
-Subject: doesnt use invoke-rc.d
+Subject: doesn't use invoke-rc.d
Package:
Version:
@@ -9,9 +9,9 @@ Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
-during a test with piuparts I noticed your package starts processes where it
-shouldnt. This is very probably due to not using invoke-rc.d as mandated by
-policy 9.3.3.2. This is seriously disturbing! ;-)
+during a test with piuparts I noticed your package starts processes
+where it shouldn't. This is very probably due to not using invoke-rc.d
+as mandated by policy 9.3.3.2. This is seriously disturbing! ;-)
See http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-opersys.html#s9.3.3
and /usr/share/doc/sysv-rc/README.invoke-rc.d.gz as well
diff --git a/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/fails_to_install.mail b/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/fails_to_install.mail
index 37f9edf..04f2efe 100644
--- a/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/fails_to_install.mail
+++ b/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/fails_to_install.mail
@@ -9,9 +9,9 @@ Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
-during a test with piuparts I noticed your package failed to install. As per
-definition of the release team this makes the package too buggy for a
-release, thus the severity.
+during a test with piuparts I noticed your package failed to install. As
+per definition of the release team this makes the package too buggy for
+a release, thus the severity.
From the attached log (scroll to the bottom...):
diff --git a/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/fails_to_install_due_to_incorrect_dependencies_in_init.d_LSB_header.mail b/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/fails_to_install_due_to_incorrect_dependencies_in_init.d_LSB_header.mail
index 9248747..e99f32d 100644
--- a/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/fails_to_install_due_to_incorrect_dependencies_in_init.d_LSB_header.mail
+++ b/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/fails_to_install_due_to_incorrect_dependencies_in_init.d_LSB_header.mail
@@ -11,9 +11,9 @@ Usertags: incorrect-dependency
Hi,
-during a test with piuparts I noticed your package failed to install due to
-incorrect dependencies in the init.d LSB header. Some debian notes are
-available from at http://wiki.debian.org/LSBInitScripts
+during a test with piuparts I noticed your package failed to install due
+to incorrect dependencies in the init.d LSB header. Some Debian notes
+are available from at http://wiki.debian.org/LSBInitScripts
From the attached log (scroll to the bottom...):
diff --git a/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/fails_to_install_due_to_insserv_rejecting_the_script_header.mail b/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/fails_to_install_due_to_insserv_rejecting_the_script_header.mail
index 1f5a4c1..3e57fdf 100644
--- a/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/fails_to_install_due_to_insserv_rejecting_the_script_header.mail
+++ b/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/fails_to_install_due_to_insserv_rejecting_the_script_header.mail
@@ -9,8 +9,8 @@ Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
-during a test with piuparts I noticed your package failed to install due to
-insserv rejecting the script header. Some notes are
+during a test with piuparts I noticed your package failed to install due
+to insserv rejecting the script header. Some notes are
available from at http://wiki.debian.org/LSBInitScripts
From the attached log (scroll to the bottom...):
diff --git a/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/fails_to_install_trying_to_overwrite_other_packages_files.mail b/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/fails_to_install_trying_to_overwrite_other_packages_files.mail
index 203815b..63ec69c 100644
--- a/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/fails_to_install_trying_to_overwrite_other_packages_files.mail
+++ b/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/fails_to_install_trying_to_overwrite_other_packages_files.mail
@@ -9,9 +9,9 @@ Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
-during a test with piuparts I noticed your package failed to install because
-it tries to overwrite other packages files without declaring a replaces
-relation.
+during a test with piuparts I noticed your package failed to install
+because it tries to overwrite other packages files without declaring a
+replaces relation.
See policy 7.6 at
http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-relationships.html#s-replaces
diff --git a/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/fails_to_purge_-_command_(deluser|adduser)_in_postrm_not_found.mail b/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/fails_to_purge_-_command_(deluser|adduser)_in_postrm_not_found.mail
index faade3b..620f640 100644
--- a/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/fails_to_purge_-_command_(deluser|adduser)_in_postrm_not_found.mail
+++ b/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/fails_to_purge_-_command_(deluser|adduser)_in_postrm_not_found.mail
@@ -9,20 +9,20 @@ Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
-during a test with piuparts I noticed your package failed to purge due to a
-command not found. According to policy 7.2 you cannot rely on the depends
-being available during purge, only the essential packages are available for
-sure.
-
-The fix should be easy: your package is using adduser or deluser from the
-adduser package, which is only priority important. Using useradd or userdel
-from the passwd package should fix this problem.
-
-Filing this as important because a.) it's a clear policy violation (to not
-clean up at purge) b.) having a piuparts clean archive is a release goal
-since lenny and c.) this package being piuparts buggy blocks packages
-depending on it from being tested by piuparts (and thus possibly the
-detection of more severe problems).
+during a test with piuparts I noticed your package failed to purge due
+to a command not found. According to policy 7.2 you cannot rely on the
+depends being available during purge, only the essential packages are
+available for sure.
+
+The fix should be easy: your package is using adduser or deluser from
+the adduser package, which is only priority important. Using useradd or
+userdel from the passwd package should fix this problem.
+
+Filing this as important because a.) it's a clear policy violation (to
+not clean up at purge) b.) having a piuparts clean archive is a release
+goal since lenny and c.) this package being piuparts buggy blocks
+packages depending on it from being tested by piuparts (and thus
+possibly the detection of more severe problems).
From the attached log (scroll to the bottom...):
diff --git a/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/fails_to_purge_-_command_in_postrm_not_found.mail b/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/fails_to_purge_-_command_in_postrm_not_found.mail
index d3c2733..84166f9 100644
--- a/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/fails_to_purge_-_command_in_postrm_not_found.mail
+++ b/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/fails_to_purge_-_command_in_postrm_not_found.mail
@@ -9,16 +9,16 @@ Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
-during a test with piuparts I noticed your package failed to purge due to a
-command not found. According to policy 7.2 you cannot rely on the depends
-being available during purge, only the essential packages are available for
-sure.
-
-Filing this as important because a.) it's a clear policy violation (to not
-clean up at purge) b.) having a piuparts clean archive is a release goal
-since lenny and c.) this package being piuparts buggy blocks packages
-depending on it from being tested by piuparts (and thus possibly the
-detection of more severe problems).
+during a test with piuparts I noticed your package failed to purge due
+to a command not found. According to policy 7.2 you cannot rely on the
+depends being available during purge, only the essential packages are
+available for sure.
+
+Filing this as important because a.) it's a clear policy violation (to
+not clean up at purge) b.) having a piuparts clean archive is a release
+goal since lenny and c.) this package being piuparts buggy blocks
+packages depending on it from being tested by piuparts (and thus
+possibly the detection of more severe problems).
From the attached log (scroll to the bottom...):
diff --git a/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/fails_to_purge_due_to_incorrect_dependencies_in_init.d_LSB_header.mail b/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/fails_to_purge_due_to_incorrect_dependencies_in_init.d_LSB_header.mail
index 85987f2..28cfe2b 100644
--- a/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/fails_to_purge_due_to_incorrect_dependencies_in_init.d_LSB_header.mail
+++ b/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/fails_to_purge_due_to_incorrect_dependencies_in_init.d_LSB_header.mail
@@ -11,9 +11,9 @@ Usertags: incorrect-dependency
Hi,
-during a test with piuparts I noticed your package failed to purge due to
-incorrect dependencies in the init.d LSB header. Some debian notes are
-available from at http://wiki.debian.org/LSBInitScripts
+during a test with piuparts I noticed your package failed to purge due
+to incorrect dependencies in the init.d LSB header. Some Debian notes
+are available from at http://wiki.debian.org/LSBInitScripts
From the attached log (scroll to the bottom...):
diff --git a/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/fails_to_upgrade_from_lenny.mail b/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/fails_to_upgrade_from_lenny.mail
index b0d85b7..38746d4 100644
--- a/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/fails_to_upgrade_from_lenny.mail
+++ b/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/fails_to_upgrade_from_lenny.mail
@@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
To: submit at bugs.debian.org
-Subject: : fails to upgrade from lenny
+Subject: fails to upgrade from lenny
Package:
Version:
@@ -10,7 +10,8 @@ Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package fails to upgrade from
-lenny. It installed fine in lenny, then the upgrade to squeeze fails.
+'lenny'.
+It installed fine in 'lenny', then the upgrade to 'squeeze' fails.
From the attached log (scroll to the bottom...):
diff --git a/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/fails_to_upgrade_from_squeeze.mail b/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/fails_to_upgrade_from_squeeze.mail
index 7d83ab2..1ffc774 100644
--- a/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/fails_to_upgrade_from_squeeze.mail
+++ b/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/fails_to_upgrade_from_squeeze.mail
@@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
To: submit at bugs.debian.org
-Subject: : fails to upgrade from squeeze
+Subject: fails to upgrade from squeeze
Package:
Version:
@@ -10,7 +10,8 @@ Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package fails to upgrade from
-squeeze. It installed fine in squeeze, then the upgrade to wheezy fails.
+'squeeze'.
+It installed fine in 'squeeze', then the upgrade to 'wheezy' fails.
From the attached log (scroll to the bottom...):
diff --git a/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/fails_to_upgrade_from_squeeze_-_trying_to_overwrite.mail b/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/fails_to_upgrade_from_squeeze_-_trying_to_overwrite.mail
index 52568ab..6f264ef 100644
--- a/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/fails_to_upgrade_from_squeeze_-_trying_to_overwrite.mail
+++ b/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/fails_to_upgrade_from_squeeze_-_trying_to_overwrite.mail
@@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
To: submit at bugs.debian.org
-Subject: : fails to upgrade from squeeze - trying to overwrite ...
+Subject: fails to upgrade from squeeze - trying to overwrite ...
Package:
Version:
@@ -10,7 +10,8 @@ Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package fails to upgrade from
-squeeze. It installed fine in squeeze, then the upgrade to wheezy fails
+'squeeze'.
+It installed fine in 'squeeze', then the upgrade to 'wheezy' fails
because it tries to overwrite other packages files without declaring a
replaces relation.
diff --git a/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/fails_to_upgrade_from_testing_-_trying_to_overwrite.mail b/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/fails_to_upgrade_from_testing_-_trying_to_overwrite.mail
index 98a2545..7ee5a41 100644
--- a/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/fails_to_upgrade_from_testing_-_trying_to_overwrite.mail
+++ b/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/fails_to_upgrade_from_testing_-_trying_to_overwrite.mail
@@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
To: submit at bugs.debian.org
-Subject: : fails to upgrade from 'testing' - trying to overwrite ...
+Subject: fails to upgrade from 'testing' - trying to overwrite ...
Package:
Version:
@@ -10,9 +10,10 @@ Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package fails to upgrade from
-'testing'. It installed fine in 'testing', then the upgrade to 'sid'
-fails because it tries to overwrite other packages files without
-declaring a replaces relation.
+'testing'.
+It installed fine in 'testing', then the upgrade to 'sid' fails
+because it tries to overwrite other packages files without declaring a
+replaces relation.
See policy 7.6 at
http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-relationships.html#s-replaces
diff --git a/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/modifying_files_from_another_package.mail b/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/modifying_files_from_another_package.mail
index 951b015..76d9db4 100644
--- a/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/modifying_files_from_another_package.mail
+++ b/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/modifying_files_from_another_package.mail
@@ -9,9 +9,9 @@ Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
-during a test with piuparts I noticed your package modifies files from another
-package in /usr. This is so wrong, I'm not even bothered to look up the part
-of policy this violates ;-P
+during a test with piuparts I noticed your package modifies files from
+another package in /usr. This is so wrong, I'm not even bothered to look
+up the part of policy this violates ;-P
From the attached log (scroll to the bottom...):
diff --git a/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/owned_after_purge_(policy_6.8_+_10.7.3).mail b/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/owned_after_purge_(policy_6.8_+_10.7.3).mail
index f1906ac..1d08b42 100644
--- a/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/owned_after_purge_(policy_6.8_+_10.7.3).mail
+++ b/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/owned_after_purge_(policy_6.8_+_10.7.3).mail
@@ -9,8 +9,8 @@ Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
-during a test with piuparts I noticed your package left owned files on the
-system after purge, which is a violation of policy 6.8 and 10.7.3:
+during a test with piuparts I noticed your package left owned files on
+the system after purge, which is a violation of policy 6.8 and 10.7.3:
http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-maintainerscripts.html#s-removedetails
http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-files.html#s10.7.3
diff --git a/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/owned_and_unowned_files_after_purge_(policy_6.8_+_10.7.3).mail b/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/owned_and_unowned_files_after_purge_(policy_6.8_+_10.7.3).mail
index 19136f7..ce0c6ee 100644
--- a/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/owned_and_unowned_files_after_purge_(policy_6.8_+_10.7.3).mail
+++ b/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/owned_and_unowned_files_after_purge_(policy_6.8_+_10.7.3).mail
@@ -10,8 +10,8 @@ Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package left owned and
-unowned files on the system after purge, which is a violation of policy 6.8
-and 10.7.3:
+unowned files on the system after purge, which is a violation of
+policy 6.8 and 10.7.3:
http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-maintainerscripts.html#s-removedetails
http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-files.html#s10.7.3
diff --git a/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/package_removed_processes_still_running.mail b/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/package_removed_processes_still_running.mail
index 11667ef..0ff5206 100644
--- a/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/package_removed_processes_still_running.mail
+++ b/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/package_removed_processes_still_running.mail
@@ -9,11 +9,12 @@ Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
-during a test with piuparts I noticed your package left processes running
-after the package has been removed and/or purged.
+during a test with piuparts I noticed your package left processes
+running after the package has been removed and/or purged.
-In http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2009/08/msg00182.html and followups
-it has been agreed that these bugs are to be filed with severity serious.
+In http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2009/08/msg00182.html and
+followups it has been agreed that these bugs are to be filed with
+severity serious.
From the attached log (scroll to the bottom...):
diff --git a/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/prompting_due_to_modified_conffiles_which_where_not_modified_by_the_user.mail b/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/prompting_due_to_modified_conffiles_which_where_not_modified_by_the_user.mail
index 582dd71..20d45fe 100644
--- a/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/prompting_due_to_modified_conffiles_which_where_not_modified_by_the_user.mail
+++ b/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/prompting_due_to_modified_conffiles_which_where_not_modified_by_the_user.mail
@@ -9,23 +9,25 @@ Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
-during a test with piuparts I noticed your package failed the piuparts upgrade
-test because dpkg detected a conffile as being modified and then prompted the
-user for an action. As there is no user input, this fails. But this is not
-the real problem, the real problem is that this prompt shows up in the first
-place, as there was nobody modifying this conffile at all, the package has
-just been installed and upgraded...
+during a test with piuparts I noticed your package failed the piuparts
+upgrade test because dpkg detected a conffile as being modified and then
+prompted the user for an action. As there is no user input, this fails.
+But this is not the real problem, the real problem is that this prompt
+shows up in the first place, as there was nobody modifying this conffile
+at all, the package has just been installed and upgraded...
This is a violation of policy 10.7.3, see
-http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-files.html#s10.7.3, which
-says "[These scripts handling conffiles] must not ask unnecessary questions
-(particularly during upgrades), and must otherwise be good citizens."
+http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-files.html#s10.7.3,
+which says "[These scripts handling conffiles] must not ask unnecessary
+questions (particularly during upgrades), and must otherwise be good
+citizens."
-http://wiki.debian.org/DpkgConffileHandling should help with figuring out how
-to do this properly.
+http://wiki.debian.org/DpkgConffileHandling should help with figuring
+out how to do this properly.
-In http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2009/08/msg00675.html and followups it
-has been agreed that these bugs are to be filed with severity serious.
+In http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2009/08/msg00675.html and
+followups it has been agreed that these bugs are to be filed with
+severity serious.
From the attached log (scroll to the bottom...):
diff --git a/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/prompts_user_without_following_Debian_Configuration_Management_Specification.mail b/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/prompts_user_without_following_Debian_Configuration_Management_Specification.mail
index 0ecd33e..7d48fa9 100644
--- a/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/prompts_user_without_following_Debian_Configuration_Management_Specification.mail
+++ b/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/prompts_user_without_following_Debian_Configuration_Management_Specification.mail
@@ -9,24 +9,25 @@ Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
-during a test with piuparts I noticed your package prompts the user badly.
-Prompting in maintainer scripts must be done by communicating through a
-program such as debconf which conforms to the Debian Configuration management
-specification, version 2 or higher.
+during a test with piuparts I noticed your package prompts the user
+badly. Prompting in maintainer scripts must be done by communicating
+through a program such as debconf which conforms to the Debian
+Configuration Management Specification, version 2 or higher.
-Refer to Debian Policy Manual section 3.9.1 (Prompting in maintainer scripts)
-for details. Quoting from
+Refer to Debian Policy Manual section 3.9.1 (Prompting in maintainer
+scripts) for details. Quoting from
http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-binary.html#s-maintscriptprompt
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[ 3.9.1 Prompting in maintainer scripts ]
-Package maintainer scripts may prompt the user if necessary. Prompting must be
-done by communicating through a program, such as debconf, which conforms to
-the Debian Configuration Management Specification, version 2 or higher.
-
-Packages which are essential, or which are dependencies of essential packages,
-may fall back on another prompting method if no such interface is available
-when they are executed.
+Package maintainer scripts may prompt the user if necessary. Prompting
+must be done by communicating through a program, such as debconf, which
+conforms to the Debian Configuration Management Specification, version 2
+or higher.
+
+Packages which are essential, or which are dependencies of essential
+packages, may fall back on another prompting method if no such interface
+is available when they are executed.
The Debian Configuration Management Specification is included in the
debconf_specification files in the debian-policy package.
diff --git a/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/unowned_directories_in_usr_local_after_purge_(policy_6.8_and_9.1.2).mail b/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/unowned_directories_in_usr_local_after_purge_(policy_6.8_and_9.1.2).mail
index d84ed33..d939b41 100644
--- a/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/unowned_directories_in_usr_local_after_purge_(policy_6.8_and_9.1.2).mail
+++ b/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/unowned_directories_in_usr_local_after_purge_(policy_6.8_and_9.1.2).mail
@@ -9,8 +9,8 @@ Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
-during a test with piuparts I noticed your package left unowned files on the
-system after purge, which is a violation of policy 6.8:
+during a test with piuparts I noticed your package left unowned files on
+the system after purge, which is a violation of policy 6.8:
http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-maintainerscripts.html#s-removedetails
diff --git a/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/unowned_files_after_purge_(policy_6.8)_violating_FHS_(policy_9.1)_too.mail b/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/unowned_files_after_purge_(policy_6.8)_violating_FHS_(policy_9.1)_too.mail
index 752c749..7e25868 100644
--- a/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/unowned_files_after_purge_(policy_6.8)_violating_FHS_(policy_9.1)_too.mail
+++ b/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/unowned_files_after_purge_(policy_6.8)_violating_FHS_(policy_9.1)_too.mail
@@ -9,8 +9,8 @@ Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
-during a test with piuparts I noticed your package left unowned files on the
-system after purge, which is a violation of policy 6.8:
+during a test with piuparts I noticed your package left unowned files on
+the system after purge, which is a violation of policy 6.8:
http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-maintainerscripts.html#s-removedetails
@@ -18,8 +18,8 @@ From the attached log (scroll to the bottom...):
As putting files into /usr/local is also a violation of
-http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-opersys.html#s9.1.2 I'm setting
-the severity to serious.
+http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-opersys.html#s9.1.2
+I'm setting the severity to serious.
cheers,
diff --git a/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/unowned_files_after_purge_(policy_6.8_and_10.8).mail b/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/unowned_files_after_purge_(policy_6.8_and_10.8).mail
index c50a04c..f0ca345 100644
--- a/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/unowned_files_after_purge_(policy_6.8_and_10.8).mail
+++ b/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/unowned_files_after_purge_(policy_6.8_and_10.8).mail
@@ -9,13 +9,13 @@ Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
-during a test with piuparts I noticed your package left unowned files on the
-system after purge, which is a violation of policy 6.8 (or 10.8):
+during a test with piuparts I noticed your package left unowned files on
+the system after purge, which is a violation of policy 6.8 (or 10.8):
http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-maintainerscripts.html#s-removedetails
-Filing this as important as having a piuparts clean archive is a release goal
-since lenny.
+Filing this as important as having a piuparts clean archive is a release
+goal since lenny.
From the attached log (scroll to the bottom...):
diff --git a/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/unowned_files_in_usr_local_after_purge_(policy_6.8).mail b/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/unowned_files_in_usr_local_after_purge_(policy_6.8).mail
index 40ddcf2..e2b5acb 100644
--- a/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/unowned_files_in_usr_local_after_purge_(policy_6.8).mail
+++ b/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/unowned_files_in_usr_local_after_purge_(policy_6.8).mail
@@ -9,8 +9,8 @@ Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
-during a test with piuparts I noticed your package left unowned files on the
-system after purge, which is a violation of policy 6.8:
+during a test with piuparts I noticed your package left unowned files on
+the system after purge, which is a violation of policy 6.8:
http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-maintainerscripts.html#s-removedetails
@@ -18,8 +18,8 @@ From the attached log (scroll to the bottom...):
As putting files into /usr/local is also a violation of
-http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-opersys.html#s9.1.2 I'm setting
-the severity to serious.
+http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-opersys.html#s9.1.2
+I'm setting the severity to serious.
cheers,
diff --git a/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/usertag_piuparts.mail b/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/usertag_piuparts.mail
index 8a6daf6..acb130f 100644
--- a/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/usertag_piuparts.mail
+++ b/org/piuparts.debian.org/htdocs/templates/mail/usertag_piuparts.mail
@@ -2,5 +2,5 @@ To: control at bugs.debian.org
Subject: usertag piuparts
user debian-qa at lists.debian.org
-usertag 563783 + piuparts
+usertag 123456 + piuparts
thanks
--
piatti.debian.org configuration files
More information about the Piuparts-commits
mailing list