Re: Upgrading from 1.0 is asking lots of questions

[Petter Reinholdtsen <pere@hungry.com>]

[Finn-Arne Johansen]
> There is 3 questions. that are asked, and all off them should be
> accepted with the default answer, which is "No"

OK.  I forgot to count, but it seemed more to me when I tried.

I upgraded maintainer.s.n just now, and was only asked two questions.
But it didn't use 1.0, it used an older installation.

I was asked about the following change in '/etc/webmin/webmin.acl':

--- /etc/webmin/webmin.acl      Sun Jul 18 09:34:27 2004
+++ /etc/webmin/webmin.acl.dpkg-new     Thu Jul  8 11:29:33 2004
@@ -1 +1 @@
-root:  acl servers webmin webminlog apache dhcpd exports grub inetd software status sshd slbackup lvm quota ldap-netgroups ldap-users
+root: acl change-user servers webmin webminlog

And this change in '/etc/webmin/miniserv.conf':

--- /etc/webmin/miniserv.conf   Tue Jan 13 15:01:27 2004
+++ /etc/webmin/miniserv.conf.dpkg-new  Thu Jul  8 11:29:34 2004
@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
 root=/usr/share/webmin
 mimetypes=/etc/mime.types
 port=10000
-host=tjener.intern
+host=
 addtype_cgi=internal/cgi
 realm=Webmin Server
 logfile=/var/log/webmin/miniserv.log
@@ -16,7 +16,7 @@
 keyfile=/etc/webmin/miniserv.pem
 libwrap=1
 alwaysresolve=1
-allow=
+allow=127.0.0.1
 blockhost_time=300
 no_pam=0
 logouttime=5
@@ -27,4 +27,7 @@
 log=1
 logclear=
 loghost=1
-
+preroot=debiantheme
+ppath=
+atboot=1
+denyfile=\.pl$

The first change seem strange, as the file is automatically generated
as far as I know.

The second contain a new footer which I suspect we want to have
included, while we might want to keep the 'allow' line.  The 'host'
line is automatically generated.

We could avoid these problems if webmin was changed to use multilevel
configuration instead.

> Actually, It's allready in the DESA: 
>  During the upgrade you will be asked if you want to upgrade some
>  config files. Please say no, as these config files are carefully tuned
>  for you debian-edu/skolelinux installation.

Ah, right.  I forgot.