Bug#30122: marked as done ([REJECTED] Fix bad advice about conffile management)
Your message dated Tue, 20 Jun 2000 23:23:19 +0100
with message-id <20000620232319.A1850@polya>
and subject line Bug#30122: [REJECTED] Fix bad advice about conffile management
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere. Please contact me immediately.)
Darren Benham
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)
--------------------------------------
Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 29 Nov 1998 05:01:47 +0000
Received: (qmail 870 invoked from network); 29 Nov 1998 05:01:39 -0000
Received: from mci109.aspentec.com (HELO neuromancer.dmccorp.com) (206.24.77.109)
by master.debian.org with SMTP; 29 Nov 1998 05:01:38 -0000
Received: by neuromancer.dmccorp.com
id m0zjyzG-000n18C
(Debian Smail-3.2.0.102 1998-Aug-2 #2); Sat, 28 Nov 1998 23:01:34 -0600 (EST)
Date: Sat, 28 Nov 1998 23:01:34 -0600
From: Steve Greenland <stevegr@debian.org>
To: submit@bugs.debian.org
Subject: [PROPOSED] Fix bad advice about conffile management
Message-ID: <19981128230134.B10436@neuromancer.@>
Reply-To: Steve Greenland <stevegr@debian.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Mailer: Mutt 0.94.12i
Organization: Not my strong point
Package: debian-policy
Version: 2.5.0.0
The policy manual still talks about providing scripts so that other
programs may modify dpkg 'conffiles'. This badly conflicts with both the
conffile mechanism and current accepted practice. I propose the
following changes to paragraphs 4-6 of section 4.7.
==== Old version =========================================================
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.
Sometimes it's appropriate to build a new package, which just provides
the basic _infrastructure_ for the other packages and which manages
the shared configuration files. (Check out the `sgml-base' package as
an example.)
==== New Version =========================================================
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'. The other packages have to
depend on the owner package.
If it is desirable for two or more related packages to share a
configuration file _and_ for all of the related packages to be able
to modify that configuration file, then the following should done:
a) do _not_ distribute the configuration file with the any of
the related packages. Instead, the postinst script of the core
related packages should ensure that the file is created (e.g.
by copying an base version from /usr/doc/<pkg>/example, or by
an interactive script). Of course, the creation should only
occur if there is no existing configuration file.
b) do _not_ mark the configuration file as a dpkg 'conffile'.
c) the core package should provide a program that the other
packages may use to modify the configuration file.
d) the related packages have to depend on the core package,
and use the provided program to make any modifications to the
configuration file
Sometimes it's appropriate to build a new package, which just provides
the basic _infrastructure_ for the other packages and which manages
the shared configuration files. (Check out the `sgml-base' package as
an example.)
==========================================================================
Steve Greenland
---------------------------------------
Received: (at 30122-done) by bugs.debian.org; 20 Jun 2000 22:24:19 +0000
>From J.D.Gilbey@qmw.ac.uk Tue Jun 20 17:24:19 2000
Return-path: <J.D.Gilbey@qmw.ac.uk>
Received: from mserv1c.u-net.net [195.102.240.33]
by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 2 (Debian))
id 134WRP-0007Vk-00; Tue, 20 Jun 2000 17:24:19 -0500
Received: from [195.102.196.29] (helo=polya)
by mserv1c.u-net.net with esmtp (Exim 2.10 #35)
id 134WQE-0000Lw-00
for 30122-done@bugs.debian.org; Tue, 20 Jun 2000 23:23:07 +0100
Received: from jdg by polya with local (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian))
id 134WQR-0000Tw-00; Tue, 20 Jun 2000 23:23:19 +0100
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 23:23:19 +0100
From: Julian Gilbey <J.D.Gilbey@qmw.ac.uk>
To: 30122-done@bugs.debian.org
Subject: Bug#30122: [REJECTED] Fix bad advice about conffile management
Message-ID: <20000620232319.A1850@polya>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
User-Agent: Mutt/1.0.1i
Delivered-To: 30122-done@bugs.debian.org
This whole issue has been resolved in more recent versions of policy.
Julian
--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Julian Gilbey, Dept of Maths, QMW, Univ. of London. J.D.Gilbey@qmw.ac.uk
Debian GNU/Linux Developer, see http://www.debian.org/~jdg
Donate free food to the world's hungry: see http://www.thehungersite.com/
Reply to: