On Fri, Apr 10, 1998 at 12:28:17PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > I have one point to add to this. Handling files not mentioned > in the *.list file was one way of several packages to handle/edit a > common file, for example, if a bunch of packages need /etc/foo to > exist, and foo can contain the word bar or bah, then any package, in > the postinst, finding that /etc/foo did not exist, can question the > user and create the file (the other packages then accept it). Thinking about it, I suppose the spelling dictionaries are an easy example of this. They each provide a /usr/dict/{english,spanish,...} file, then arrange for the /etc/dictionary symlink to point to an appropriate place. I'd only considered the possibility of have each package depend on a minimal template package (etc_dictionary.deb, say) up until this point. (although I note that the dictionary packages will be moving to an alteratives system in slink, so that's not the greatest example). > I think this may be a useful thing to do. I do not think that > extrafiles should abrogate this functionality; so I want to add a > rider that files listed in extrafiles may have more than one owner. I'm happy either way. Something like the following could be added: ====diff==== ] --- proposal.orig Sat Apr 11 04:09:56 1998 ] +++ proposal.txt Sat Apr 11 04:11:16 1998 ] @@ -27,9 +27,16 @@ ] files that aren't distributed with the package, but are instead ] created over the course of a package's presence on a system. ] ] +In some cases, two or more packages may use one or more files to share ] +information. For example, the wordlist packages each manipulate ] +/usr/dict/words and /etc/dictionary to point to a dictionary of the ] +user's choice. In this case, each of the packages should specify the ] +common files as extrafiles, thus claiming a "joint ownership" of ] +those files. ] + ] Files that should be specified in the extrafiles control area file ] include such things as log files, spool directories and their ] -contents, configuration files (in particular those that aren't ] +contents, and configuration files (in particular those that aren't ] conffiles -- see chapter 9). ====diff=== Since there seems to be some controversy over this, if I may put my two cents in now: I'm not inclined to worry either way. It seems like it'd be nice to encourage people to split out the common sections of their packages, but it doesn't seem a useful thing to require, at least at this point. Perhaps, presuming extrafiles lists are added to a significant number of packages, we can use them to see how much trouble it will cause maintainers if this were to be made a requirement later? > There fore dpkg --listfiles may return more than one hit. (dpkg --search, I presume you mean) And it can already do that in the case of directories, so this doesn't seem too much of a worry. Cheers, aj -- Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/> I don't speak for anyone save myself. PGP encrypted mail preferred. ``It's not a vision, or a fear. It's just a thought.''
Attachment:
pgpTWnYF2YtE1.pgp
Description: PGP signature