Wouter Verhelst wrote: > On 30-05-13 22:36, Uoti Urpala wrote: > > While there is room for reasonable disagreement about the relative > > benefits of different configuration setups, "completely inferior even to > > dpkg-conffile handling" is not part of any reasonable disagreement. That > > claim is simply false. > > No. That claim is an expression of opinion.
Calling something "an opinion" does not make it valid. It may be someone's opinion that 1+1=3, but that's simply false whether it's "an opinion" or not. > Marc believes that > dpkg-conffile handling is superior to having defaults in /usr/lib (or > thereabouts) and only overriding those from /etc. To begin with, that's comparing apples to oranges. You're comparing the behavior of the packaging system on upgrades to the behavior of the application in use. The most plausible way I can construct something reasonable-sounding from your text is the comparison "application default config in /etc and user modifies existing files to configure; dpkg-conffile handling of those files on package upgrades" vs "application default config in /usr/lib and user can add files to /etc to override everything or just particular options; package upgrades always simply update files in /usr/lib to new version with no other special action for configuration". Now you could have different reasonable opinions about the tradeoffs in these two cases, though "completely inferior" would still be exaggerated hyperbole at best. But this comparison does not match the original context of the discussion, where application behavior by itself was criticized. Obviously the application is not responsible for what Debian packaging does on upgrades, and the package upgrades could easily behave differently. If you want to post your opinion about a controversial topic, at least you should do a better job of phrasing exactly what it is that you're claiming. If people don't agree to begin with, you shouldn't expect them to make all the same implicit assumptions you do. And here it seems more like sloppy thinking where even you yourself hadn't thought through your assumptions. Also, these issues were already covered in the thread a year ago (and your post doesn't look like you'd have understood the arguments there but disagreed). -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1370124763.3628.310.camel@glyph.nonexistent.invalid