[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Bug#379089: Configuration file shadowed?

Re: Frank Küster 2006-07-21 <[🔎] 86slku93ym.fsf@alhambra.kuesterei.ch>
> I believe that we need to rephrase the TeX Policy.  But this requires
> not just to specifiy that each "cfg" file must be in /etc.  Instead, I
> think we need to find a distinction between
> - files that can be used to modify the behavior of programs, and/or
>   files that make sense to customize site-wide behavior on a multiuser
>   system (I just cannot find an example of a file that would only
>   fulfill the second half of the sentence)
>   => must go to /etc

I remeber that a tetex update last year (maybe even longer ago) had
prompted me and several others for about a dozen changed conffiles I
had never heard of before and I surely had never touched. Similarly, I
have seen some debconf prompts that asked me about tex settings I
wouldn't ever use. I might have run at the wrong debconf priority
there, but the point is: imho the vast majority of tetex users will
never touch any of the settings and be happy with the defaults, so
please make sure that any new conf(ig) file you introduce does not
prompt the user. Likewise, if you are going to overwrite a file
outside of /etc on upgrade that one out of 1000 users might have
touched, please don't prompt, but tell the users in README.Debian to
use dpkg-divert. Imho, in this case, customizing for the
might-have-changed case doesn't serve the (other) users who are just
confused by the questions.

> - files that can be used to modifiy the typesetting of documents
>   => should not go to /etc

Users will probably copy these files to the directory where that
document lives, so there is no need to treat them specially.

cb@df7cb.de | http://www.df7cb.de/

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: