On Wed, 08 Feb 2006, Frank Küster wrote: > Don Armstrong <don@debian.org> wrote: > > The configuration file is the file from which the configuration is > > read, that is, the file in /var/lib/blah which isn't in /etc. [...] > > 1: In the sense that they can't decide that using the conf.d is silly > > and ship a single configuration file. > > Okay, I see your point. Generally I agree with you, although in the > particular example, teTeX, your're wrong: They still can override > the scheme. Heh. There's a reason why we're talking about package 'blah' here. ;-) > People who forgot (or never noticed) that the file is generated from > files in conf.d will open /etc/texmf/bla.conf in their favorite > editor, change the generated file without noticing, and will be > surprised if the change is lost after the next package upgrade. This should be an indication that you're not preserving administrator changes to configuration files if this occurs... > > A third option would be to build the conffile in /var/lib/blah, > > and use ucf or similar to prompt for the difference betwen > > /var/lib/blah and /etc/blah. > > Been there, done something similar. ucf is a nice workaround for a > missing feature in dpkg, but it confuses users. I avoid it if I can. I actually like ucf, but the point here is that it's another option which is also policy compliant. Don Armstrong -- Dropping non-free would set us back at least, what, 300 packages? It'd take MONTHS to make up the difference, and meanwhile Debian users will be fleeing to SLACKWARE. And what about SHAREHOLDER VALUE? -- Matt Zimmerman in <gYuD3D.A.ayC.nGB39@murphy> http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature