Bug#150511: tetex-bin: the postinst fails to preserve user changes in /etc/texmf/texmf.cnf and others
From: "Manoj Srivastava" <srivasta@debian.org>
Subject: Bug#150511: tetex-bin: the postinst fails to preserve user changes in /etc/texmf/texmf.cnf and others
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 21:33:40 -0500
> The postinst moves /etc/texmf/texmf.cnf, and
> /etc/texmf/fmtutil.cnf out of the way, and creates new versions,
> losing any user changes, in direct violation of policy. This is most
> certainly not desired behaviour, since I had spent a lot of time
> crafting the configuration files.
Well, I have a feeling that you misunderstand the new scheme
of tetex-bin.
What is your main point in fact?
- Dou you know that local changes of /etc/texmf/texmf.cnf
will be preserved if a user changes it through modifying
files in /etc/texmf/texmf.d/ or adding appropriate file(s)
in /etc/texmf/texmf.d/ and run "update-texmf"?
(I believe it is very rare that a user should modify the files
in /etc/texmf/texmf.d/ which tetex-bin owns.)
The direct editing of /etc/texmf/texmf.cnf is not reasonable
with our new scheme.
- Or do you claim that /etc/texmf/texmf.cnf should be in,
for example, /var/lib/texmf/web2c/ ?
But the nature of it is precisely that of configuration
file because, as you cited, policy says
> 11.7.1. Definitions
> -------------------
>
> configuration file
> A file that affects the operation of a program, or provides site-
> or host-specific information, or otherwise customizes the
> behavior of a program. Typically, configuration files are
and texmf.cnf really affects the operation of TeX, and/or
provides site- or host-specific information.
So I guess it is not reasonable.
- Or do you want that /etc/texmf/texmf.cnf of potato version
should be preserved in woody? To achive this, we should
divide old /etc/texmf/texmf.cnf into several files with
appropriate contents and move them into /etc/texmf/texmf.d/05TeXMF
etc. automatically but I guess it is too dangerous to do
such delicate file handlings in postinst.
Further, it is not desirable to modify /etc/texmf/texmf.d/05TeXMF
etc. and it will be much better to add an appropriate modification
with /etc/texmf/texmf.d/20local etc. and it is almost
impossible to do this automatically.
So the effort to preserve changes in /etc/texmf/texmf.cnf
of potato during upgrading to woody will lose much but
get nothing.
Further, IMHO, it seems policy says nothing explicitly on the
preservation of changes when a package removes a conffile
(texmf.cnf) and installs new conffiles (/etc/texmf/texmf.d/05TeXMF
etc.).
- The reason of the new scheme is to provide flexible
enough method to setup texmf.cnf for many related packages,
such as xmltex, ptex-bin, jtex-bin,...
Without update-texmf these package should lose their
sane functionality.
Best regards, 2002.6.24
--
Debian Developer & Debian JP Developer - much more I18N of Debian
Atsuhito Kohda <kohda@debian.org>
Department of Math., Tokushima Univ.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-tetex-maint-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: