Re: policy for shipping sysctl.d snippets in packages?
- To: Debian Devel <debian-devel@lists.debian.org>
- Subject: Re: policy for shipping sysctl.d snippets in packages?
- From: Tom H <tomh0665@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 3 May 2017 04:51:27 -0400
- Message-id: <[🔎] CAOdo=SwWZiTTm=jPN47k3k5q_0wcV2gY5wnCOoMFzbeDgQGcUQ@mail.gmail.com>
- In-reply-to: <20170430182245.egom55et7vpz6nst@grep.be>
- References: <20170423101658.diqp4ubgzyhq7wbx@nana.phantasia.die-welt.net> <20170423190041.x6slcy7vpaqw245z@grep.be> <CAOdo=SxugG5=F2EXwZSz65tuZN9sAS5HjSDB5wgP1guf-d6UxQ@mail.gmail.com> <20170427071854.tmpt2eav2hjyvfhq@grep.be> <CAOdo=SxpzqqVtZEEhY1Cq2nhDhxWkomaF1Zcp-6zpx_A7ssitA@mail.gmail.com> <20170430182245.egom55et7vpz6nst@grep.be>
On Sun, Apr 30, 2017 at 2:22 PM, Wouter Verhelst <wouter@debian.org> wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 29, 2017 at 03:48:09PM -0400, Tom H wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 3:18 AM, Wouter Verhelst <wouter@debian.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> I didn't say RPM *doesn't* deal with changed files; I said ours
>>> deals with it better. I stand by that.
>>
>> Sure; and an rpm or emerge user'll tell you that dpkg is inferior
>> because an interactive upgrade's a crazy thing to do.
>
> Yes, sure. This discussion is getting increasingly side-tracked though.
>
> The original question was "should I install defaults in /etc or /usr?"
> to which I replied that in Debian, we've traditionally done the former
> rather than the latter, and that the latter feels like a result of an
> ecosystem (other than ours) where dealing with conflicting changes to
> configuration files is frowned upon. I think our way is better, but
> I'm sure others disagree.
If Debian decides to drop into "/etc" files that are dropped into
"/usr/lib" (or "/lib") upstream because rpm and others can't handle
config file upgrades, it would be a decision not based on facts.
Reply to: