Bug#162120: debian-policy: Deletion of configuration files--should it be preserved?
On Wed, Sep 25, 2002 at 12:47:29PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> I fail to see a reason why we should over ride user changes
> whener we, the maintairners, feel a capricious whimsy to doso, even
> when we believe our way is the one true way, and the silly admin
> ought to know better than to meddle in the affairs of his betters.
>
> manoj
> trying to counter some rhetoric on this report
If you're trying to "counter some rhetoric", could you _please_ do it
with something other than rhetoric of your own?
No one is saying that rewriting your /etc/inetd.conf to remove all the
local changes you've made is a clever thing to do. You're not arguing
against people not preserving user changes in general, you're arguing
against the specific case of reinstating removed configuration files.
Now, you gave an example in another message that you might want to do
that in creating a "honeypot". I've no idea why you would -- removing the
config file doesn't buy you anything (the daemon still starts, you can
still start the daemon with other options if you either edit the config
file or specify a different config file on the command line), and a better
effect can be achieved by making it so you can remove inetd entirely
(which was what the thread on -devel was originally about). If you need
the same effect you would get by removing the file, you can simply clear
it or comment everything else, which also has the benefit of the results
matching your intuition (ie, inetd starts, and nothing happens).
Cheers,
aj
--
Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.
``If you don't do it now, you'll be one year older when you do.''
Reply to: