Bug#170019: debian-policy: Ambiguity in section 11.7.2 (Configuration files: Location)
On Thu, Nov 21, 2002 at 10:24:18AM +0200, era eriksson wrote:
> So if a package maintainer fails to create symbolic links from
> /usr/lib to /etc, is it a "should" or a "must" violation?
That's not a policy violation at all. OTOH, if the program breaks because of
it, normal bug severity rules apply.
> Anyway, what are the criteria for conforming to "should consider"?
That "there are several" files to be put in /etc/, and that one wishes to
think about it.
If it's two files, and no further increase in perspective, then it's
probably not necessary. If there are five and more to come, then it's
probably necessary.
> *** debian-policy-3.5.6.1.orig/policy.sgml Thu Mar 14 20:17:48 2002
> --- debian-policy-3.5.6.1/policy.sgml Thu Nov 21 10:18:50 2002
> ***************
> *** 5823,5835 ****
> <p>
> Any configuration files created or used by your package
> must reside in <tt>/etc</tt>. If there are several you
> ! should consider creating a subdirectory of <tt>/etc</tt>
> named after your package.</p>
>
> <p>
> If your package creates or uses configuration files
> outside of <tt>/etc</tt>, and it is not feasible to modify
> ! the package to use the <tt>/etc</tt>, you should still put
> the files in <tt>/etc</tt> and create symbolic links to
> those files from the location that the package
> requires.</p>
> --- 5823,5835 ----
> <p>
> Any configuration files created or used by your package
> must reside in <tt>/etc</tt>. If there are several you
> ! should create a subdirectory of <tt>/etc</tt>
> named after your package.</p>
>
> <p>
> If your package creates or uses configuration files
> outside of <tt>/etc</tt>, and it is not feasible to modify
> ! the package to use the <tt>/etc</tt>, you must still put
> the files in <tt>/etc</tt> and create symbolic links to
> those files from the location that the package
> requires.</p>
I'd have preferred a unified diff, but nevertheless... :)
The first change removes the option and makes having >= 2 files directly in
/etc/ a normal bug. You need seconds for that.
The second change makes it consistent as far as the first clause is
concerned, but then it also mandates the symlinks. This makes it confusing
again. :)
I'd just take the "should" in the second sentence as overridden by the
"must" in the one in the previous paragraph. Its relation to the second
clause is pretty much implied -- you should do this if you don't want your
package to break.
Frankly, it should be enough to simply mandate /etc for all configuration
files, I don't know why we keep this exception for other directories.
--
2. That which causes joy or happiness.
Reply to: