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

Re: [DEP9] call for testing of reconf-inetd (update-inetd replacement)

On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 09:41:40AM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote [edited]:
> Putting local config into /usr/share is wrong though.

the answer to all local policy questions is: like you always did; you edit

/usr/share/reconf-inetd fragments are input to a *maintainer* tool. you can
abuse it for local policy, but then you're on your own

> Another question: How do I disable a fragment? In udev I can create a
> rule file with the same name as one in /lib/udev to disable it. [If it
> was covered I'm sorry, Fosdem talks aren't downloaded yet.]

as a local sysadmin, you don't disable a reconf-inetd fragment; you disable an
inetd.conf entry by preceding it "with exactly one hash character (`#')"
(quote from the last paragraph of Policy 11.2).

reconf-inetd will not change user-disabled inetd.conf entries. this behaviour
is documented and tested in scenaria 1-12 in [0]

once again: DEP9 does not change the way sysadmins configure inetd


ps. you won't find any such answers in my fosdem talk; the talk is more about
    how to replace a tool that impacts many maintainers, most of which won't
    give any feedback until you've done all the work

[0] http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=collab-maint/reconf-inetd.git;a=blob;f=features/no-action.feature

Reply to: