Re: preferred method for coexistence of debconf- and manual parts in conf[ig ]files?

[frank@kuesterei.ch (Frank Küster)]

Steve Langasek <vorlon@netexpress.net> schrieb:

>> The problem with that is, as pointed out in the bug report, is that now
>> both the debconf database and language.dat are under /var, where backups
>> are rarely done on homeusers systems, and he wants it under
>> /etc.
>
> Er, if you're not backing up /var/lib, that's your own damn fault.

Of course, but that's what the latest bug report was about. And I can
understand the reporter: If you've got a fckd up desktop system and some
Debian CD's at hand, plus your backups of /home, /usr/local and /etc,
you're not going to loose much - neither time nor data.

> There's been plenty of argument over this, but
> no one who could do the work to fully parse the config files seems
> willing to spend the time on it. 

I hope that ucf might present a solution (although I've only heard
rumors about it)

>> I would prefer it to be under /etc also because it _is_ a configuration
>> file, and thus it belongs there. But to preserve the possibility of
>> local additions, I would like to find a way for co-existence of
>> debconf-managed and manually-edited parts.
>
> I would say that, even though this is a cop-out, it's a better solution
> than what's in place for tetex today.

Hm, so this is in contrast to what Colin and Andreas said, as far as we
think about a quick-and-dirty solution. Comments?

Bye, Frank
-- 
Frank Küster, Biozentrum der Univ. Basel
Abt. Biophysikalische Chemie