On Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 5:07 PM, Colin Watson <email address hidden> wrote:
> I'm not objecting to that part of it. My point was more that, at
> minimum, the alternative target needs to reside in /etc, not /usr -
> otherwise the package effectively violates policy for /etc.
Great point, Colin. Sorry about that. I have filed and am fixing Bug
#738992 now!
On Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 5:07 PM, Colin Watson <email address hidden> wrote:
> I'm not objecting to that part of it. My point was more that, at
> minimum, the alternative target needs to reside in /etc, not /usr -
> otherwise the package effectively violates policy for /etc.
Great point, Colin. Sorry about that. I have filed and am fixing Bug
#738992 now!
--
:-Dustin