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

Re: lintian and (non-)conffiles in /etc



On Tue, Nov 13, 2001 at 05:22:53PM +0900, Atsuhito Kohda wrote:
> > Policy does not require files in /etc to be marked as conffiles.  When I
> Agreed.  Then don't you think that the lintian' message is
> inappropriate?

If you include a configuration file in the .deb then:

	(a) it *must* be marked as a conffile, *and*

	(b) it *must not* be modified by programs (postinsts, update-*
	    programs, etc; vi, emacs, etc are fine obviously)

If you want to create or modify a configuration file automatically
(use debconf to generate a specialised version for an install, have an
update-* tool to update it from other packages postinsts, etc), then it
*must not* be included in the .deb, but rather must be created in the
package's preinst or postinst, and remove in the postrm on "purge".

If you do not do this then either:

	(a) the user's configuration gets quietly overwritten during an
	    upgrade (and this is the case lintian is telling you
	    about), or

	(b) the user gets a bunch of confusing messages insisting s/he
	    reconcile changes in a configuration file s/he's never seen
	    before in her/his life.

Cheers,
aj

-- 
Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.

 "Security here. Yes, maam. Yes. Groucho glasses. Yes, we're on it.
   C'mon, guys. Somebody gave an aardvark a nose-cut: somebody who
    can't deal with deconstructionist humor. Code Blue."
		-- Mike Hoye,
		      see http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/armadillos.txt

Attachment: pgpUqS_1Px3Bo.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: