RFC: Proposal to improve package configuration upgrades
Hello
The other day, I was upgrading cups and dpkg did ask me the usual way
if I wanted to keep my cups config file or take the upstream version.
Like always, I asked for a diff and was quite puzzled because I did
not remember anything about editing this file. Then I remembered that
I did a modification through cups admin web interface.
Previous common story you might say. But for a casual user (like my
mother-in-law which now use Debian Lenny ;-) ), this can be
frustrating:
- I did modify the config through a nice web interface
- during the upgrade, I either have to look at all the gory details of
cupsd config file or I have to loose my configuration.
I was thinking that this is a typical case where package upgrade
could be better handled with Config::Model help.
So, I've written a wiki page [1] that explains:
- how configuration upgrade are managed by Config::Model
- how to implement such upgrades with Approx example:
* create a configuration model for approx.conf
* the patch required for approx package scripts
- how to use a new dh_ tool that will simplify setup of configuration
upgrade for package based on debhelper (dh_config_model_upgrade). A
patch for openssh-server is provided.
- the bonus (config GUI)
- the current limitations (*)
To approx and openssh maintainers: Is there something missing that would
prevent you to use Config::Model for your package ?
Other package maintainers: what do you think ? Can this be applied to the
configuration of your packages ?
You can either reply to this mail or directly edit the wiki page [1].
All the best
[1] http://wiki.debian.org/PackageConfigUpgrade
(*) Manoj, I have not attempted a model for sendmail... ;-)
--
Dominique Dumont
"Delivering successful solutions requires giving people what they
need, not what they want." Kurt Bittner
irc:
domidumont at irc.freenode.net
ddumont at irc.debian.org
Reply to: