Re: RFC: OpenRC as Init System for Debian
Gergely Nagy wrote:
> Uoti Urpala <email@example.com> writes:
> > Not having the files in /etc by default does have technical advantages.
> > It's easier to see what is local non-default configuration. Original
> > default file is always available in a known location (and very easy to
> > revert to, temporarily for testing or permanently). You can use
> > ".include /lib/defaultsfile" then override some value, which in most
> > cases is more maintainable than the 3-way merging required by
> > "traditional" conffiles.
> Perhaps then the packages that right now ship symlinks to /lib/systemd/
> stuff could be changed to ship a file that consists of a single .include
Note that the general case is not just about existing symlinks, but also
cases were /etc contains no file unless you want to override default
configuration, and the program then reads the default from /lib instead.
> That way, they can be treated as normal conffiles without any of the
> disadvantages of a symlink. diffing and whatnot will magically work, and
> we'd still have the benefit of having /lib/systemd/ separate from the
> /etc/systemd/ overrides.
I don't see how this would avoid the need to improve dpkg diffing or add
another tool. When would the change alerts trigger? dpkg wouldn't warn
about the file in /lib, because it would never be modified from the
default distro state by the user; and it wouldn't warn about the file
under /etc, because it'd almost never change between package versions
(every version would contain just the same "include" line). To provide
alerts, something needs to be aware of the connection between the files
- show an alert if the user has created/modified a file under /etc AND a
corresponding file under /lib changes between package versions.
Note that as described above, due to the include option cases where you
actually need to do anything manually in response to such alerts should