On Wed, Mar 27, 2002 at 10:38:11AM +1100, Matthew Palmer wrote:
> I decide to package something which has a totally different use for
> a file not otherwise owned by a package, but which is on the system and used
> by a bunch of packages (/etc/passwd, /etc/mailname et al are not good
> examples, because they are specified by policy). But anyway, I have this
> hypothetical file which I want to use and which nobody else has a claim to
> My program uses this file in a completely different way to whatever else
> might already be out there. However, since nobody else owned it (and,
> presumably, I decided to take it under my package's wing - or even if I
> didn't) there is no other package which can say "you're using it wrong".
How do you mean? Anyone can say you're using it wrong because you break
other packages. That is a grave bug.
> Honestly, I think that every file, or at least sub-directory tree root,
> should be owned by a package, except in very select circumstances. There
> must be good reasons for it not being so, but it's protection if nothing
This is one such file that can't be in the dpkg domain because it would
break things. See the other subthread, up to <[🔎] 20020326165657.GB12546@cibalia.gkvk.hr>.
2. That which causes joy or happiness.
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to email@example.com
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact firstname.lastname@example.org