[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#87711: marked as done ([AMENDMENT 29/03/2001] Clarification of example configuration files)

Your message dated Wed, 18 Apr 2001 17:24:21 +0100
with message-id <20010418172421.B17776@polya>
and subject line Bugs closed: debian-policy_3.5.3.0_i386.changes INSTALLED
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; 26 Feb 2001 13:00:56 +0000
>From J.D.Gilbey@qmw.ac.uk Mon Feb 26 07:00:56 2001
Return-path: <J.D.Gilbey@qmw.ac.uk>
Received: from mserv1a.vianw.co.uk [::ffff:] 
	by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 1 (Debian))
	id 14XNGq-0006bH-00; Mon, 26 Feb 2001 07:00:56 -0600
Received: from [] (helo=polya)
	by mserv1a.vianw.co.uk with esmtp (Exim 3.22 #5)
	id 14XNGm-0002wG-00
	for submit@bugs.debian.org; Mon, 26 Feb 2001 13:00:53 +0000
Received: from jdg by polya with local (Exim 3.22 #1 (Debian))
	id 14XNGl-0002BG-00; Mon, 26 Feb 2001 13:00:51 +0000
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001 13:00:51 +0000
From: Julian Gilbey <J.D.Gilbey@qmw.ac.uk>
To: submit@bugs.debian.org
Subject: [PROPOSAL] Clarification of example configuration files
Message-ID: <20010226130051.A8293@polya>
References: <20010226114333.A4355@cibalia.gkvk.hr> <Pine.LNX.4.21.0102261318440.19605-100000@mizar.ping.uio.no>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.15i
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0102261318440.19605-100000@mizar.ping.uio.no>; from ovek@arcticnet.no on Mon, Feb 26, 2001 at 01:21:06PM +0100
X-Debbugs-CC: Ove Kaaven <ovek@arcticnet.no>, Josip Rodin <joy@cibalia.gkvk.hr>, Michael Beattie <mjb@debian.org>, debian-mentors@lists.debian.org, debian-devel@lists.debian.org
Sender: Julian Gilbey <J.D.Gilbey@qmw.ac.uk>
Delivered-To: submit@bugs.debian.org

Package: debian-policy
Severity: wishlist

[Following from a thread on -mentors]

The question: can you have a default configuration file in
/usr/share/doc which is copied by the postinst to /etc if it does not
yet exist?

On Mon, Feb 26, 2001 at 01:21:06PM +0100, Ove Kaaven wrote:
> Maybe you misunderstood what I was referring to... of course changing or
> messing with them isn't, but generating/installing them from e.g.
> /usr/share/doc/foo/examples is a violation, according to 13.3.

Ah, you're right.  13.3 and 11.7.3 contradict over this point: 13.3
does not permit accessing it from a program, whereas 11.7.3
specifically suggests this course of action.

I would like to suggest the following resolution:

    A common practice is to create a script called `<package>-configure'
    and have the package's `postinst' call it if and only if the
    configuration file does not already exist.  In certain cases it is
    useful for there to be an example or template file which the
-   maintainer scripts use.  Such files should be in `/usr/share/doc' if
-   they are examples or `/usr/lib' if they are templates, and should be
-   perfectly ordinary `dpkg'-handled files (_not_ `conffiles').
+   maintainer scripts use.  Such files should be in
+   `/usr/share/<package>' or `/usr/lib/<package>', with a symbolic
+   link from `/usr/share/doc/<package>/examples' if they are
+   examples, and should be perfectly ordinary `dpkg'-handled files
+   (_not_ `conffiles').

The reason I'm suggesting this is that there is talk of dpkg being
able to selectively ignore (not install) certain directory trees.
Now, if someone decides to ignore /usr/share/doc, the original method
will break, but this one will still work.  And the decision whether to
use /usr/share or /usr/lib is probably not about templates, but about
whether the package is arch-indep or not, as per FHS.

I'm not convinced that this is the right thing to do, though; what do
people think?

Please keep the discussion to the BTS only, which is automatically
copied to -policy, so that this doesn't get discussed on three mailing



         Julian Gilbey, Dept of Maths, Queen Mary, Univ. of London
       Debian GNU/Linux Developer,  see http://people.debian.org/~jdg
  Donate free food to the world's hungry: see http://www.thehungersite.com/

Received: (at 87711-done) by bugs.debian.org; 18 Apr 2001 22:00:49 +0000
>From J.D.Gilbey@qmw.ac.uk Wed Apr 18 17:00:49 2001
Return-path: <J.D.Gilbey@qmw.ac.uk>
Received: from mserv1e.vianw.co.uk [] 
	by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 1 (Debian))
	id 14q00B-00088F-00; Wed, 18 Apr 2001 17:00:48 -0500
Received: from [] (helo=polya)
	by mserv1e.vianw.co.uk with esmtp (Exim 3.22 #5)
	id 14q005-0006sk-00; Wed, 18 Apr 2001 23:00:38 +0100
Received: from jdg by polya with local (Exim 3.22 #1 (Debian))
	id 14pukf-0004eN-00; Wed, 18 Apr 2001 17:24:21 +0100
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 17:24:21 +0100
From: Julian Gilbey <J.D.Gilbey@qmw.ac.uk>
To: 86507-done@bugs.debian.org, 87007-done@bugs.debian.org,
	87711-done@bugs.debian.org, 87828-done@bugs.debian.org,
	88651-done@bugs.debian.org, 88788-done@bugs.debian.org,
	91276-done@bugs.debian.org, 93047-done@bugs.debian.org,
	93620-done@bugs.debian.org, 93705-done@bugs.debian.org
Subject: Bugs closed: debian-policy_3.5.3.0_i386.changes INSTALLED
Message-ID: <20010418172421.B17776@polya>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.17i
Sender: Julian Gilbey <J.D.Gilbey@qmw.ac.uk>
Delivered-To: 87711-done@bugs.debian.org

Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 08:10:16 -0400
From: Debian Installer <installer@ftp-master.debian.org>
Subject: debian-policy_3.5.3.0_i386.changes INSTALLED
To: Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org>,
        Debian Policy List <debian-policy@lists.debian.org>

fhs.txt byhand
fhs-2.1.html.tar.gz byhand
policy.txt.gz byhand
menu-policy.txt.gz byhand
mime-policy.txt.gz byhand
virtual-package-names-list.txt byhand
policy.pdf.gz byhand
policy.html.tar.gz byhand
libc6-migration.txt byhand
  to pool/main/d/debian-policy/debian-policy_3.5.3.0_all.deb
debconf_specification.txt.gz byhand
policy.ps.gz byhand
  to pool/main/d/debian-policy/debian-policy_3.5.3.0.dsc
  to pool/main/d/debian-policy/debian-policy_3.5.3.0.tar.gz
Changes: debian-policy ( unstable; urgency=low
  * Removed recommendation on packaging-manual
                                    closes: Bug#86507, #93620, #93705
  * Also now Conflicts and Replaces packaging-manual
  * Remove FSSTND from binary package, although retain it in the source
    package for the time being
  * Get the version.ent non-compression thingy right this time!
  * Also install FHS stuff byhand (as requested by webmasters)
  * Corrected GPL name and location         closes: Bug#88788, #93047
  * Correct bug severities                          closes: Bug#91276
  * Correct typos etc. in policy-process
  * Rename all .text files as .txt
  * Fixed the to to typo in policy.                  closes: Bug#87007
  * Changed packaging manual ==> dpkg documentation  closes: Bug#88651
  * [ACCEPTED 14/03/2001] Deprecate confusing        closes: Bug#87828
    Build-Depends arch syntax
  * [AMENDMENT 29/03/2001] Clarification of example  closes: Bug#87711
    configuration  files
  * Undo all renaming to text, since the change had not been propogated to
    the rules file, which broke badly. This shall have to wait for a later
Announcing to debian-devel-changes@lists.debian.org
Setting bugs to severity fixed: 86507 87007 87711 87828 88651 88788 91276 93047 93620 93705 

If the override file requires editing, reply to this mail.

Thank you for your contribution to Debian.

Reply to: