Re: Bug#19129: sendmail: support PPP links --- use /etc/ppp/ip-up.d
Charles Briscoe-Smith <cpbs@debian.org> wrote:
> Right. Since they're under /etc, they should be conffiles, to avoid
> nasty suprises. However, they won't be -modified- conffiles simply
> because the sysadmin doesn't want them run.
>
> I'd suggest the following:
>
> When run-parts is started, it looks in the directory it's about to run
> scripts from for two files: run.allow and run.deny. Since these contain
> dots, they can't interfere with an unmodified run-parts' normal operation.
> The rules would be similar to hosts.{allow,deny}: run-parts would, for
> each script, run it if its name is in run.allow, otherwise not run it if
> its name is in run.deny, otherwise run it anyway. base-files or similar
> can provide conffiles /etc/ppp/ip-{up,down}/run.deny containing a "*"
> to make the default "don't run anything".
>
> Whadayathink?
It strikes me that this adds a layer of complication, without actually adding any significant functionality.
If instead we were to say that it is up to the local sysadmin to add scripts to the ip-(up|down).d directory, and that packages that had a need for such things should include example scripts under /usr/doc, then we would still have the default behavior of doing nothing, and would not need to change run-parts.
For packages where the maintainer feels that the vast majority of users would want the ip-up script installed (I cannot think of any, but there may be some), they could ask the user in the postinst if they would like the ip-(up|down).d scripts installed.
In all but the most simple setups, you are going to want to edit the ip-up scripts anyway, so the idea that you will save yourself a config file by having this central on/off file is fiction IMHO.
I for example have ppp links to two ISP's and about twenty other sites. My ip-up/down scripts therefore have to have case statements in them that make them behave differently depending upon the link that just came up.
So, in conclusion, I think the packages that could benefit from having ip-(up|down) scripts, should not install anything in /etc/ppp/ip-(up|down).d by default, but should instead include example scripts in their /sur/doc/PKG/examples directory.
--
While we're on the subject. I suppose we could standardise the names that scripts are given. I'd like to suggest that they be given names that start with a couple of digits, followed by the package name, and that sysadmins be encouraged to call their own locally written scripts something with `local' in it.
So on might expect to see a script that came with fetchmail being called:
40fetchmail
and I have a couple of scripts I wrote, called:
00local-ipfwadm
99local-getmail
The reason for the digits, is to determine the order in which run-parts runs the scripts (I cannot pick up my mail until the ipfwadm script has opened up my filter rules a little).
Cheers, Phil.
ppp@packages.debian.org
--
E-mail the word "unsubscribe" to debian-policy-request@lists.debian.org
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST. Trouble? E-mail to listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: