Re: Bug#189370: acknowledged by developer (irrelevant)
On Monday 21 April 2003 04:24 pm, Adam Heath wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Apr 2003, Keegan Quinn wrote:
> > On Monday 21 April 2003 03:29 pm, Atsuhito Kohda wrote:
> > > Am I missing something?
> >
> > Only the fact that, as Debian maintainer, you do not have the right to
> > decide which files Debian users may or may not edit. Policy says they
> > can do as they like, regardless if you like it or your packages care for
> > their way, and you are not allowed to overwrite their actions.
> >
> > Now, am I missing something?
>
> Yes, lots.
>
> Only configuration files are protected as you say. Conffiles are
> automatically protected by dpkg, but not all configuration files are
> conffiles.
So, you're saying that the texmf.cnf file in question is not a configuration
file? Section 11.7.1 from policy seems to say otherwise. Maybe I'm
seriously misreading something. I didn't mean to bring conffiles or dpkg
into this at all, but perhaps I missed some part of the discussion.
<policy>
configuration file
A file that affects the operation of a program, or provides site- or
host-specific information, or otherwise customizes the behavior of a program.
Typically, configuration files are intended to be modified by the system
administrator (if needed or desired) to conform to local policy or to provide
more useful site-specific behavior.
</policy>
(I realize I don't need to point to policy as a stick to beat people with, et
al. I'm becoming a bit confused just following this thread, and am wondering
where that happened, since the core issue seems straightforward.. If I am in
need of more sleep, please point that out.)
- Keegan
PS. I'm subscribed, no need for a Cc.
Reply to: