Re: Bug#29770: Policy contradicts itself about /etc/aliases
Hi,
>>"Joey" == Joey Hess <joey@kitenet.net> writes:
>> 4.7. Configuration files
>> ------------------------
>>
>> If two or more packages use the same configuration file, one of these
>> packages has to be defined as _owner_ of the configuration file, i.e.,
>> it has to list the file as `conffile' and has to provide a program
>> that modifies the configuration file.
>>
>> The other packages have to depend on the _owner_ package and use that
>> program to update the configuration file.
>>
Joey> Unless I'm confused, this bit of policy is broken. Conffiles
Joey> should not be modified by packages.
Please explain the rationale for this. As long as user changes
are preserved, why should a program designed to modify a conffile not
modify it? Especially if the design philosophy is that the original
file installed with the package shall never change, and the modifier
be always used to optionally effect non-local changes.
Joey> I think we should probably remove "has to list the file as
Joey> conffile'" from the first paragraph. I propose we do so (if I
Joey> need to file a bug report or something with this proposal, let
Joey> me know, I'm unsure how our new system for policy modifications
Joey> works).
I'll send you the procedi=ure in private email.
manoj
--
I stick my neck out for nobody. Humphrey Bogart, "Casablanca"
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@acm.org> <http://www.datasync.com/%7Esrivasta/>
Key C7261095 fingerprint = CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
Reply to: