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

Re: Declarative Diversions - GSoC Project Update 1

On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 03:55:11PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Tollef Fog Heen <tfheen@err.no> writes:

> > I'd like us to go with the standard that's used in most other similar
> > files: RFC2822 style, so something like:

> > Divert-From: /usr/share/foo
> > Divert-To: /usr/share/bar

> > Divert-From: /usr/share/baz
> > Divert-To: /usr/share/coo

> > This makes it easier to figure out what the contents of the file means
> > when you're tired or don't care to check the documentation.

> Do we even need a "Divert-To"? In most cases the new name doesn't matter
> or it is enough to know that the new name will be old name +.dpkg-divert
> or +.<package> choosen automatically.

> With RFC2822 style it would be possible to make the Divert-To optional
> without being confusing to read or parse.

There are definitely cases where Divert-To would be needed; Tollef has
pointed out one, another is when diverting a shared library because you have
to divert to a completely different directory to ensure ldconfig doesn't
pick it up and create a symlink to the wrong (diverted) file.

But yes, if we go with an RFC2822-style file, it's straightforward to make
this optional with a sensible fallback.  dpkg-divert already has a built-in
default (according to the manpage) of <original>.distrib; that's probably
reasonable to use here.

Steve Langasek                   Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer                   to set it on, and I can move the world.
Ubuntu Developer                                    http://www.debian.org/
slangasek@ubuntu.com                                     vorlon@debian.org

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: