bz532373, was Re: tor dependency insanity.

[Paul Wouters]

On Wed, 3 Mar 2010, Enrico Scholz wrote:

>> Upstream reports a logging bug.
>
> ??? You and Noa Resare were the only one who reported the non-logging as
> a bug and some posts ago you said that you are not upstream.  So, why do
> you think that upstream reported a logging bug?

I pointed you to http://bugs.noreply.org/flyspray/index.php?do=details&id=1133
which is the upstream bug tracker, and I told you those bugs were filed in a
joined session with 5 tor developers at GSoC. Please stop taking 2 line quotes
out of context. Thanks.

>>  	WONTFIX; The alternative would be something like '%postun() script
>>  	failed'. RH/Fedora should fix its core utils before it can expect to
>>  	follow such guidelines.
>>
>> I don't even know what to say here. A provenpackager should just fix
>> your %post lsb output.
>
> its a bug in redhat-lsb (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=522053),
> not tor

No. your %post may not output anything. It's a bug in tor. You're
just pissing over the endusers with your fight over init systems.
If you cared about the users of the tor package, you would work around any
potential problems instead of cat'ing bugzilla numbers.

>>> Fixed init scripts to use Fedora Guideline Package version which
>>> prevents trying to execute non-existing files in /usr/lib/lsb/
>>
>> That wasn't solved last time i looked.
>
> that was a bug in redhat-lsb which was fixed in F-10
> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=375361).

Okay.

Paul