Re: It's Huntin' Season
On Sun, 3 Feb 2002, Davide G.M.Salvetti wrote:
> AH> Yes, correct. I should have said that files in /etc are edittable
> AH> config files. This means either using dpkg's conffile mechanism,
> AH> or, easily broken maintainer script versions.
> The Debian auctex and mailcrypt packages don't mark
> /etc/emacs/site-start.d/50auctex.el and
> /etc/emacs/site-start.d/50mailcrypt.el as conffiles.
This is fine, as long as the files are not in the deb. Only(not more, not
less) files in /etc that are shipped in packages(debs) are to be marked as
conffiles. dpkg-deb won't allow you to list a file as a conffile if it
doesn't exist in the package.
> Those file need not necessarily exist: if they do not, they are
> dynamically created at installation time if the user answer yes to the
> relevant debconf question, asking if she wants the respective packages
> to be auto loaded at her site.
> They are no meant to serve any other purpose, are one-liner, and also
> aren't meant to be directly edited by the user (however, if she actually
> does it, the packages feature a minimal attempt to preserve her wishes).
> They are where they are 'cause the Debian Emacs policy requires them to
> be there.
Then your package has a serious(RC) bug. Policy(11.7) states that packages
which place files in /etc(either by having it in the deb, or thru some
maintainer script) *MUST* preserve user edits.
This doesn't mean you can interpeted as attempting to save changes. Must is
must is must.
> Should we change the Debian Emacs policy to allow me to put them
> somewhere else?
Emacs policy is wrong in this sense then. Emacs policy does not replace
Debian Policy, it enhances it. And Debian Policy is very clear about files