On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 03:55:11PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: > Tollef Fog Heen <tfheen@err.no> writes: > > I'd like us to go with the standard that's used in most other similar > > files: RFC2822 style, so something like: > > Divert-From: /usr/share/foo > > Divert-To: /usr/share/bar > > Divert-From: /usr/share/baz > > Divert-To: /usr/share/coo > > This makes it easier to figure out what the contents of the file means > > when you're tired or don't care to check the documentation. > Do we even need a "Divert-To"? In most cases the new name doesn't matter > or it is enough to know that the new name will be old name +.dpkg-divert > or +.<package> choosen automatically. > With RFC2822 style it would be possible to make the Divert-To optional > without being confusing to read or parse. There are definitely cases where Divert-To would be needed; Tollef has pointed out one, another is when diverting a shared library because you have to divert to a completely different directory to ensure ldconfig doesn't pick it up and create a symlink to the wrong (diverted) file. But yes, if we go with an RFC2822-style file, it's straightforward to make this optional with a sensible fallback. dpkg-divert already has a built-in default (according to the manpage) of <original>.distrib; that's probably reasonable to use here. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/ slangasek@ubuntu.com vorlon@debian.org
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature