On Tue, Mar 26, 2002 at 01:33:28AM +0100, 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.
While it's not a requirement, I'd like to point out one reason why I'd
like /etc/mailname owned by some package.
It's documentation: When I am looking for information about some config
file, I usually do dpkg -S filename to find out the package the file
belongs to. Then I expect appropriate documentation in
/usr/share/doc/packagename, or in some manualpage listed in
dpkg -L packagename. One great thing about debian is that this
For other files, of course, basic documentation is contained in comments
within the config file. But this is not the case for /etc/mailname, and
I think it would not be easily possible to add comments to this file
without breaking some programs.
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to email@example.com
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact firstname.lastname@example.org