Re: RFC Debian package upgrade with Config::Model
Jonas Smedegaard <email@example.com> writes:
> One comment: If I read it correctly, you use .cds as extension for
> temporary dumps at package upgrades.
Yes. cds is supposed to mean "Config-model Dump String", but the
extension can be anything else.
> Tools like etckeeper, backup routines and IDS'es like integrit might
> get annoyed by those.
Are these tools annoyed by .dpkg-new or .dpkg-old files ?
One advantage of storing dump file in /etc is that reviewing the
upgrade is much easier: the config file and the dump file are side by
side. But I agree that it's a small advantage.
> I recommend either mimicing a common extension
A common extension like '~' ? Do you have other extensions in mind ?
> or storing in a tree below e.g. /var/lib/config-model.
Actually, the file name for the temporary dump is specified in the
package scripts (prerm and postinst). If many packages use Config::Model
to perform upgrades, many dump files may be written during massive
upgrades. Having a consistent naming policy to avoid clashes will be
May be something like, mimicking /etc structure under
/var/lib/config-model/upgrade (*) would work. This way, approx dump file
would land in /var/lib/config-model/upgrade/approx/approx.cds
What do other people think ?
All the best
(*) using upgrade subdirectory will let me use other kind of storage in
/var/lib/config-model, like user annotations ...