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

Re: /etc/mailname



On Tue, Mar 26, 2002 at 12:00:18PM +1100, Matthew Palmer wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Mar 2002, Santiago Vila wrote:
> 
> > Yves Arrouye wrote:
> > > [ about /etc/mailname ].
> > > But some package should own it yes.
> > 
> > It has never been a requirement that every file in the system
> > should be owned in the "dpkg -S" sense by some package.
> 
> However, if a file is deleted that is not owned by any package, then no
> package should have a problem with that.  I don't think that's the case for
> /etc/mailname.  I seem to recall having mail sent as 'mjp16@<null>' (yes,
> entirely literal string) at one point in the dim past, as a result of not
> having an /etc/mailname.
> 
> If a package wants a file, it should either own it or depend on a package
> that does.

Yes. And is there a good reason for this file to be a special case ?
It looks like a conffile to me.

Christophe

> 
> 
> -- 
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> #include <disclaimer.h>
> Matthew Palmer
> mjp16@ieee.uow.edu.au
> 
> 
> -- 
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
> 

-- 
Christophe Barbé <christophe.barbe@ufies.org>
GnuPG FingerPrint: E0F6 FADF 2A5C F072 6AF8  F67A 8F45 2F1E D72C B41E

In a cat's eye, all things belong to cats.
--English proverb

Attachment: pgpmsUbX6Am2J.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: