Re: Ideas to improve dpkg/ucf with hooks [was: Putting default config files in /usr]
Le 13/11/2015 18:39, Manoj Srivastava a écrit :
> Hi,
>
> Adding in his or callbacks would be easy enough. Do you have an
> idea of what you would need for your use case?
I've some ideas, but no final proposition. Some thoughts:
- to be able to know :
* the old file and the new (proposed) one before merging
* the new file after merge (can be difficult if the 'merge' is done
manually after the package installation) => should probably be done
as currently by etckeeper, ie with a apt hooks after installation
and a crontab job.
* all of this with the package (and the versions) involved
- to be able to propose new merge strategies:
* 3 ways merges even for packages that does not use the --three-way
option
* cme based merge/update (if possible)
* specific merge strategies provided by other tools (for all or for
some config files)
- to be able to ask dpkg to use ucf (or to use the same callback
and extended merge strategies) [because ucf does not cover lots of
config files for now]
- to improve dpkg so that ucfr can register files into the dpkg file
database (so that dpkg -S also works)
And, after the current discussion, I have new thoughts for more complex
things:
- to be able to track external directory (/usr/...) as 'models' for
config files and to present the same kind of resolution conflict
when a file in /etc is present that override a modified default config
file in /usr
This can be a bit more difficult to integrate if we want to be
able to do a kind of 'git diff official..master' to get only local
config modification. And if we want to support partial override (such
as services.d systemd directories)
Regards
Vincent
> Manoj
>
> On November 13, 2015 9:22:45 AM PST, Vincent Danjean <vdanjean.ml <http://vdanjean.ml>@free.fr> wrote:
>
> Le 13/11/2015 17:47, Marc Haber a écrit :
>
> Actually, I don't quite see why ucf would need hooks since it is
> called from the maintainer scripts, giving the local admin full power
> of creativity anyway. Chances are that ucf is already the right tool
> to maintain systemd and friends the Debian way if the Debian packaging
> team would be willing to.
>
>
> Because I cannot see a way (but diverting ucf itself) to interface it
> with etckeeper so that original maintainer files will be kept in a
> different git branch with merges in the master branch to keep the
> modified config.
>
> Regards
> Vincent
>
>
> --
> Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
--
Vincent Danjean GPG key ID 0xD17897FA vdanjean@debian.org
GPG key fingerprint: 621E 3509 654D D77C 43F5 CA4A F6AE F2AF D178 97FA
Unofficial pkgs: http://moais.imag.fr/membres/vincent.danjean/deb.html
APT repo: deb http://people.debian.org/~vdanjean/debian unstable main
Reply to: