Re: Not just a dpkg/run-parts problem

[Steve Greenland <steveg@moregruel.net>]

On 17-Nov-02, 17:54 (CST), Clint Adams <schizo@debian.org> wrote: 
> Unless the library is going to let users define their own policies, I
> think a clearly-defined spec is the way to go.  I see value in
> configurable expressions, but that seems potentially dangerous.
> 
> I agree that specifying what is legal is preferable to maintaining a
> list of exceptions, but the combination of dpkg and the LSB make that
> impossible, as far as I can tell.  For example,
> /etc/cron.daily/find.dpkg-dist matches the LSB [hier1]-[name] pattern,
> if find.dpkg is a valid DNS name, and there's no good way to know that
> find.dpkg is not a valid DNS name.

So we are stuck with having a)some basic pattern and b) list of
extensions that should be skipped. Or possibly just b). In that case, I
think we *must* have (a library/command line program/wrapper modules),
because the list of extensions is going to be an ongoing project (see
Craig Sanders msg), and there's no way that everyone will be able to
stay in sync.

OTOH, allowing the list to change is probably a bad idea from our user's
POV, as files that were executed yesterday suddenly are not, and files
that weren't suddenly are. If we are going "spec-only", then I make the
following suggestion:

1. Specify a namespace (probably beginning or ending pattern) that
will *alway* be skipped, now and forever more, and migrate the Debian
tools dpkg, Xsession, cron, modutils, etc. Submit the pattern to
the LSB folks, so that we can get it standardized (which means it
should probably *not* be something that contains 'deb' or 'debian' or
suchlike).

2. List specific extensions that override (augment?) the above, so that
existing systems don't provide to many suprises. Probably includes the
obvious: .dpkg-*, .orig, .bak, .yyyymmdd, .yy-mm-dd.

But that should be *it*. No additions, no subtractions, nobody's
favorite extension of the week. Otherwise we'll go nuts. If we are
not willing to take the hardline on this, then we should go down the
required library route.

Note that "foo makes backups of extension .bar" is *NOT* a legitimate
argument unless there is some reason to expect that foo will be used
in the directories affected; these are not random user directories.

Steve


-- 
Steve Greenland

    The irony is that Bill Gates claims to be making a stable operating
    system and Linus Torvalds claims to be trying to take over the
    world.       -- seen on the net