>>"Matthew" == Matthew Palmer <email@example.com> writes:
Matthew> 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.
Matthew> However, if a file is deleted that is not owned by any
Matthew> package, then no package should have a problem with that. I
Sounds like no package did.
Matthew> don't think that's the case for /etc/mailname. I seem to
Matthew> recall having mail sent as 'mjp16@<null>' (yes, entirely
Matthew> literal string) at one point in the dim past, as a result of
Matthew> not having an /etc/mailname.
Heh. If you removed the file, then that is what you wanted,
evidently. The human is god, to user programs (have we already
Matthew> If a package wants a file, it should either own it or depend
Matthew> on a package that does.
That would not help. If you went and removed the file, even if
it was a conffile.
If you remove files from /etc, you ought to know what you are doing.
The little pieces of my life I give to you, with love, to make a
quilt to keep away the cold.
Manoj Srivastava <firstname.lastname@example.org> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to email@example.com
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact firstname.lastname@example.org