On Tue, Jun 25, 2002 at 12:07:19PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > >>"Steve" == Steve Langasek <vorlon@netexpress.net> writes: > >>>> This file is automatically generated by update-modules" > I would like to add: > Please delete the line above if you do not want this file overwritten. > >> Please do not edit this file directly. If you want to change or add > >> anything please take a look at the files in /etc/modutils and read > >> the manpage for update-modules. > Steve> When Manoj was positing on IRC, the idea came up of using ucf > Steve> to manage /etc/modules.conf. If that could be used to > Steve> successfully determine whether the user has made local changes > Steve> without modifying the first line, I think that's a great idea. > Sure it can. My original bug report had such a mechanism -- > one you had primed ucf, it would work. The problem here is that this > means that every single package that deals with /etc/moudutils/blah > would need to depend on ucf, and use those incantations; and this, > apparently, is way too onerous. My objection to this is that the ucf management should be handled by update-modules directly, not by each maintainer script that currently invokes it. Not only would it make for less work now, it would make for less work later if a bug shows up. (I note that ucf is priority: optional, and modutils is priority: required; however, I also note that ucf, which AIUI is a straightforward shell script, has no dependencies at all, so there's no reason modutils couldn't incorporate it directly if the modutils approved of this solution.) Steve Langasek postmodern programmer
Attachment:
pgp1vhPQbw5sw.pgp
Description: PGP signature