Re: "The Debian exim 4 packages suck badly" on exim-users@exim.org
- To: debian-legal@lists.debian.org
- Subject: Re: "The Debian exim 4 packages suck badly" on exim-users@exim.org
- From: Henning Makholm <henning@makholm.net>
- Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2005 05:40:35 +0000
- Message-id: <[🔎] 20050219054035.GA2995@henning.makholm.net>
- In-reply-to: <87acq1xgbx.fsf@becket.becket.net>
- References: <20050218201516.GB20765@moregruel.net> <1108770304.15517.4.camel@arrakis.localnet> <20050219012949.GA6971@moregruel.net> <1108778520.27007.7.camel@arrakis.localnet> <20050219022547.GA16148@alltel.net> <20050219023654.GB10489@www.lobefin.net> <20050219031936.GA17039@alltel.net> <87sm3txm8w.fsf@becket.becket.net> <87hdk9xhb2.fsf@kreon.lan.henning.makholm.net> <87acq1xgbx.fsf@becket.becket.net>
Scripsit Thomas Bushnell BSG
> Henning Makholm <henning@makholm.net> writes:
> > Scripsit Thomas Bushnell BSG <tb@becket.net>
> > > The point is that I want to massage some parts of the configuration
> > > and not others. I want the others to continue to get updated by the
> > > normal package installation process.
> > So is the whole thing essentially a workaround for dpkg's current
> > lack of good conffile update management, or would you still prefer the
> > separate files way if dpkg magically gained a well-tested and stable
> > conflict resolution scheme with bells, whistles, and 3-way merges?
> Um, no, I don't think I said that.
OK. I would appreciate having explained what I'm missing then.
#include<standard disclaimer about not being rhetorical but actually
wanting to understand the topic>
--
Henning Makholm "Nett hier.
Aber waren Sie schon mal in Baden-Württemberg?"
Reply to: