Re: use and abuse of debconf
Julian Gilbey wrote:
>On Mon, Jan 15, 2001 at 11:04:42AM +0000, Oliver Elphick wrote:
>> While I support your general case, the use of this particular example does
>> not help it. Presumably this file (besides containing the above warning
>> line) is not marked as a conffile, so the maintainer should have the right
>> to modify it. Of course, if it is a conffile, the warning is inappropriat
>No, no, no! Read the section on configuration files in policy, in
>particular 4.7.3. Configuration files need not be conffiles, but
>must nevertheless not be modified by package upgrades.
I see; I had forgotten that bit. Sorry!
Oliver Elphick Oliver.Elphick@lfix.co.uk
Isle of Wight http://www.lfix.co.uk/oliver
PGP: 1024R/32B8FAA1: 97 EA 1D 47 72 3F 28 47 6B 7E 39 CC 56 E4 C1 47
GPG: 1024D/3E1D0C1C: CA12 09E0 E8D5 8870 5839 932A 614D 4C34 3E1D 0C1C
"For I know that my redeemer liveth, and that he shall
stand at the latter day upon the earth"