minor edits

[Eric Dantan Rzewnicki-2]

Hi,

I've just completed a first reading of the Debian Policy Manual (version
3.8.3.0, 2009-08-16). Below are some suggestions for minor edits. If it
would be better to send them in some other form, please let me know.

Thanks,
Eric Rz.


Footnote 1 this/these interface(s) disagreement

Footnote 48 s/a shared libs may/a shared lib may/

4.5 s/relayed/related/

5.6.6 s/that it is that/it is that/

5.6.8 s/information how/information on how/

5.6.11 s/or the all four/or all four/

5.6.18 s/of blank line)./of a blank line)./

6.6 3.1.2. s/left in an "Half-Installed"/left in a "Half-Installed"/  (also occurs 2x in 5.2. and 6.8 3.)
    3.2.   s/the packages is/the package is/

8.6.2 s/adding -tudeb as option/adding the -tudeb option/

9.1.2 s/Note,/Note/

9.1.3 s/should not owned/should not be owned/

10.2 reference to LinuxThreads ... should it be NPTL?

11.8.6 s/which must registered/which must be registered/


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-policy-REQUEST@...
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@...

[Manoj Srivastava]

Hi,

        Thanks for the report. I have applied fixes to all of the bugs
 pointed out, apart from the  LinuxThreads/NPTL issue, which I think is
 not a typo, but a real normative bug.  I think that LinuxThreads are
 mostly  obsolete, and I think there is a bug report for the reference
 to be removed from policy.

        I have pushed out the changes to the public git repo as well.

        manoj
--
MAC user's dynamic debugging list evaluator?  Never heard of that.
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@...> <http://www.debian.org/~srivasta/>  
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B  924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-policy-REQUEST@...
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@...

[Ben Finney-5]

Eric Dantan Rzewnicki <eric@...> writes:

> I've just completed a first reading of the Debian Policy Manual
> (version 3.8.3.0, 2009-08-16). Below are some suggestions for minor
> edits. If it would be better to send them in some other form, please
> let me know.

There's nothing especially wrong with describing the changes as you've
done.

But since you ask, yes, there is a more useful way: a patch, generated
by some ‘diff’ tool from a comparison between the existing source
document and a modified version with the changes you propose.

For many sources, there is an official VCS repository that you can
branch locally, make your changes, and then use the ‘diff’ operation of
the VCS to generate a patch between the official and local versions. In
the case of the Debian policy, the document source is in a Git
repository:

    $ git clone git://git.debian.org/git/dbnpolicy/policy.git

I found that URL by examining the ‘control’ file for the ‘debian-policy’
source package; many packages have their packaging VCS repository
specified in the ‘VCS-foo’ field, where ‘foo’ is the name of the VCS
tool used to fetch the repository.

Of course, all this assumes that your interest in contributing changes
in patch form extends to gaining the knowledge to use the required VCS
tool, but that's a decision for you to make; as you can see, changes
*not* submitted as patches are also fine.

Hope that helps.

--
 \     “I used to think that the brain was the most wonderful organ in |
  `\   my body. Then I realized who was telling me this.” —Emo Philips |
_o__)                                                                  |
Ben Finney


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-policy-REQUEST@...
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@...