Re: XFree 4.0.1
Daniel Burrows wrote:
>
> On Fri, Dec 15, 2000 at 09:57:26AM -0800, Erik Steffl <steffl@bigfoot.com> was heard to say:
> > > Should it be considered a bug that upgrading X will silently clobber
> > > non-debconf modifications to that file, replacing them with the debconf
> > > values? Or is this acceptable?
> >
> > you can set debconf to either ask the same questions again and agan
> > (and again...) or not. if you set it to not to ask old question it uses
> > your former responses. at least that's what I think isa happening, I
> > have it set up so that it asks old Qs again and it always asks if the X
> > should be allowed to start by rootOnly/console/anybody.
>
> Well, yes, that's a reasonable explanation for how that value got there
> (although I don't remember choosing it, I probably forgot or something)
>
> That wasn't the point of my message though, and maybe I shouldn't even have
> mentioned it.
>
> What concerns me is that X then clobbered my settings because I didn't
> go through debconf. Is editing files in /etc with a text editor now
> considered `pilot error'? If this specific file isn't meant to be touched,
> maybe a big "DO NOT EDIT THIS FILE USE DEBCONF INSTEAD" message should be
> put at the top?
>
> It just seems to me that Policy section #4.7.3 prohibits this, and rightly
> so! -- but I thought I should check before filing yet another bug.
>
> Now that I looked, though, it seems that bug #79504 has already been opened
> (although at a lower priority than I would've used for such an evil
> policy violation), so I think I'll shut up :)
I noticed this on some other cases. most of the packages present you
with a menu, asking if the file should be overwritten and show the
differences. but e.g. postfix did not bother (even though it did not
completely changed the config file, talking about /etc/postfic/main.cf)
erik
Reply to: