[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: imp blows away hand-edited changes...

> > 
> > defaults.php3 is not a conffile.  
> it does not matter whether it is a listed conffile or not. what matters
> is that it is a configuration file which is automatically blow away.
> > And notice was made using debconf's facility as a note to state this
> > to the end user that the defaults file is now rebuilt automatically
> > each time it is installed...and that a backup was made prior to this.
> providing notice that you're going to do something evil and
> brain-damaged is no justification.
> if every package took this attitude towards configuration files then
> it would be too dangerous to ever upgrade a debian system. after every
> upgrade the system admin would have to remember hundreds of config files
> and edit them back to what they were before the upgrade fucked them up.

I can understand this.   I plan on taking out all the debconf stuff anyways
because it's causing too many problems...well, not really it, but this
is just an example of issues I've had.

> overwriting hand-edited config files is just plain wrong. no package
> should ever do it, for any reason without asking specifically for
> permission just prior to doing it.
> > The package does follow policy in this manner.  
> no it doesn't. in fact, imp is breaking policy because
> /etc/imp/defaults.php3 is not in the package and therefore does not
> belong to imp.

ok...I never looked at it this way...I looked at it from the point that
IMP builds it and thus it's IMP's.  I've also looked at it from the future
of IMP's standpoint where all configuration will be done through IMP eventually
and I've been trying to work in that direction.

> > Just because I haven't had the chance to finish my configuration
> > pieces of it and work out other bugs doesn't mean I'm not following
> > policy.
> you should not have released a postinst script that overwrites a config
> file UNTIL you had implemented a way of doing it safely and sanely.

I understand your poinnt, and I'm not excusing myself when I say this, but
I wanted to work on things one piece at a time...I didn't want to do everything
needed first just to have a ton of possible things to troubleshoot.  I wanted
to do it in stages...apparantly that was the wrong way to do it.

tis ok...I'll revert to the old methods and come up with some other way
to do this.


Ivan E. Moore II
GPG Fingerprint=F2FC 69FD 0DA0 4FB8 225E 27B6 7645 8141 90BC E0DD

Reply to: