Package: debian-policy Version: 3.2.1.2 Severity: wishlist None of this proposal changes any actual mandated policy, so I am not certain that it requires seconds. I feel the policy editor should regard these as typographic corrections, since the language offered in various rationale statements was ephemeral. --- policy.sgml.orig Sun Jan 21 14:48:38 2001 +++ policy.sgml Sun Jan 21 15:30:17 2001 @@ -5872,38 +5872,15 @@ <p> <em>Programs that may be configured with support for the X Window - System</em> must be configured to do so and must declare any + System</em> must be configured to do so and must declare any package dependencies necessary to satisfy their runtime requirements when using the X Window System, unless the package in question is of standard or higher priority, in which case X-specific binaries may be split into a separate package, or alternative versions of the package with X support may be - provided.<footnote> - <p> - <strong>NOTE</strong> The forthcoming major X Window - System release shall probably change this - drastically. - </p> - <p> - This seems to be more what people want. It will enable - packages like vim-tty to become legal if they are - promoted to standard priority. Also, that X client in - mtools can be split into its own package and made - optional. - </p> - <p> - This paves the way for xlib6g and xfree86-common to be - moved from standard to optional, <strong>if</strong> all - Xlib dependent packages are moved from standard to - optional priority (or if non-Xlib-linked versions are - retained in standard). That, however is up to the - affected package maintainers and the archive - maintainers, and is not mandated by this policy. - </p> - </footnote> + provided. </p> - <p> <em>Packages which provide an X server</em> that, directly or indirectly, communicates with real input and display hardware @@ -5911,15 +5888,12 @@ virtual package <tt>xserver</tt>. <footnote> <p> - Rationale: implement current practice, and provide an - actual policy for usage of the "xserver" virtual package - which appears in the virtual packages list. - In a nutshell, X servers that interface directly with - the display and input hardware or via another subsystem - (e.g., GGI) should provide xserver. Things like Xvfb, - Xnest, and Xprt should not. <strong>NOTE</strong> The - forthcoming major X Window System release shall probably - change this drastically. + This implements current practice, and provides an actual + policy for usage of the "xserver" virtual package which + appears in the virtual packages list. In a nutshell, X + servers that interface directly with the display and input + hardware or via another subsystem (e.g., GGI) should provide + xserver. Things like Xvfb, Xnest, and Xprt should not. </p> </footnote> </p> -- G. Branden Robinson | The basic test of freedom is perhaps Debian GNU/Linux | less in what we are free to do than in branden@debian.org | what we are free not to do. http://www.debian.org/~branden/ | -- Eric Hoffer
Attachment:
pgpE2kA_Et3zf.pgp
Description: PGP signature