Bug#541872: debian-policy: identical notation for disabled-by-user and auto-generated entries in /etc/inetd.conf
Serafeim Zanikolas <serzan@hellug.gr> writes:
> On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 04:18:13PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote [edted]:
>> I would suggest disallowing example entries altogether; let packages
>> use the '#<off>#' syntax instead. Or is there some reason I'm missing
>> why we would want to support so many different ways for packages to add
>> lines to update-inetd?
> I'm all for simplicity, so by all means let's disallow example entries.
> - If a package wants to install an example entry into `/etc/inetd.conf',
> - the entry must be preceded with exactly one hash character (`#').
> - Such lines are treated as "commented out by user" by the
> - `update-inetd' script and are not changed or activated during package
> - updates.
> + Lines preceded with exactly one hash character (`#') are treated as
> + "commented out by user" by the `update-inetd' script and must not be
> + changed or activated during package updates.
> The case of example entries is beyond the scope of policy. update-inetd
> can easily get a new ``--add-disabled'' switch (which will be identical
> to ``--add'' except for prefixing the entry with '#<off># ').
I agree with this in principle, but adding that as a must is going to make
a fair number of packages instantly buggy. We should have some sort of
transition plan and advance warning for packages that install example
inetd entries, I think.
It shouldn't be too difficult to detect calls to update-inetd where the
service is commented out.
--
Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Reply to: