[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#522364: debian-policy: Remove obsolete /var/mail transition requirement



On Thu, 2009-04-02 at 21:57 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Package: debian-policy
> Version: 3.8.1.0
> Severity: minor
> 
> This looks extremely obsolete.  I think it can just be removed.
> 
> Seconds?

Seconded.

Regards,
					Andrew.

> 
> diff --git a/policy.sgml b/policy.sgml
> index 975df94..a5c9d13 100644
> --- a/policy.sgml
> +++ b/policy.sgml
> @@ -5697,12 +5697,6 @@ rmdir /usr/local/share/emacs 2>/dev/null || true
>  	    by any particular mail agents.  The use of the old
>  	    location <file>/var/spool/mail</file> is deprecated, even
>  	    though the spool may still be physically located there.
> -	    To maintain partial upgrade compatibility for systems
> -	    which have <file>/var/spool/mail</file> as their physical mail
> -	    spool, packages using <file>/var/mail</file> must depend on
> -	    either <package>libc6</package> (&gt;= 2.1.3-13), or on
> -	    <package>base-files</package> (&gt;= 2.2.0), or on later
> -	    versions of either one of these packages.
>  	  </p>
>  	</sect1>
>        </sect>
> 
> -- System Information:
> Debian Release: squeeze/sid
>   APT prefers testing
>   APT policy: (990, 'testing'), (500, 'unstable'), (1, 'experimental')
> Architecture: i386 (i686)
> 
> Kernel: Linux 2.6.26-1-686 (SMP w/1 CPU core)
> Locale: LANG=en_US.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
> Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash
> 
> debian-policy depends on no packages.
> 
> debian-policy recommends no packages.
> 
> Versions of packages debian-policy suggests:
> ii  doc-base                      0.9.1      utilities to manage online documen
> 
> -- no debconf information
> 
> 
> 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
andrew (AT) morphoss (DOT) com                            +64(272)DEBIAN
   The goal of good engineering is not to ask "what if?", but to ask
    "how do I make this work as well as possible". -- Linus Torvalds

------------------------------------------------------------------------





Reply to: