On Mon, Jun 20, 2005 at 10:13:11AM +0200, Andreas Schuldei wrote: > On Mon, Jun 20, 2005 at 01:04:09AM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > > I believe the local admin (or the CDD tool behaving as if it was the > > local adming - in violation of Debian Policy 10.7.4) can't blame the > > packaging system if changing conffiles into something else than files. > > I think we come closer to the core of the problem when looking at > the *packaging system* as the problem. In it's present form it is > not fit to deal with upgrading conffiles or config files, while > it should be. What I have in mind is a program that helps administrators to configure their custom Debian distribution. At user side it is like apt-get, hence the name ccd-adm. cdd-adm setup This sets up parameters for a system. It asks the class of a system ( e.g. server, workstation, thin-client server ), domain name and other site specific information. cdd-adm install <package> Updates the configuration file of <package> The actual work sysadm have to do with their editor(tools), but now automated. cdd-adm install-complete Does `cdd-adm install` for each package that is listed for the class of system as defined in the setup. cdd-adm update Get fresh configuration.in and scripts from a (remote) repository. It could be that I'm re-inventing cfengine. Yes, the idea is the same: Keep installation and configuration seperated. That is what IMHO is also the idea behind Debian policy about _not_ changing conffiles from other packages. > I think we come closer to the core of the problem when looking at > the *packaging system* as the problem. In it's present form it is > not fit to deal with upgrading conffiles or config files, while > it should be. The *packaging system* is fine, at least leave it as it is and focus on the configuration files. Let `apt-get install foo` allow to leave an unuseable conffile, repair it with `cdd-adm install foo`. Cheers Geert Stappers
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature