On Tue, Oct 23, 2001 at 05:30:03PM -0200, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
worry that some package will come along and wipe out their changes
simply because it wasn't a conffile.
A package that does anything that braindamaged, must not be allowed outside
unstable (and its maintainer
On Tue, Oct 23, 2001 at 05:30:03PM -0200, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
worry that some package will come along and wipe out their changes
simply because it wasn't a conffile.
A package that does anything that braindamaged, must not be allowed outside
unstable (and its maintainer
On Tue, 23 Oct 2001, Julian Gilbey wrote:
On Tue, Oct 23, 2001 at 05:30:03PM -0200, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
worry that some package will come along and wipe out their changes
simply because it wasn't a conffile.
A package that does anything that braindamaged, must
On Tue, 23 Oct 2001 01:41, Matt Armstrong wrote:
On Fri, Oct 19, 2001 at 02:10:02PM -0500, Warren Turkal wrote:
Why not just create a symlink to a device node /dev/flipit and
just link it to the right file.
Why/how would that help?
Then /etc/flipit.conf could just always have
Matt Armstrong wrote:
In general, I'm confused about non-conffile stuff going in /etc.
People are used to editing whatever they want to in /etc. It seems
like if a package is going to take over a given file (e.g. an
/etc/flipit/port symlink), then it should not be in /etc but in /var
would that help?
Julian
Then /etc/flipit.conf could just always have /dev/flipit, and the
package's maintainer scripts would control where /dev/flipit pointed
to.
Yuck, yuck, yuck, yuck.
Let /etc/flipit.conf just be the symlink or contents directly and not
be a conffile. Where's the big
On Mon, 22 Oct 2001, Matt Armstrong wrote:
In general, I'm confused about non-conffile stuff going in /etc.
If it is a configuration file, it belongs in /etc. If it is a conffile
(i.e., a dpkg-managed configuration file), it cannot be modified in any way
by maintainer scripts.
This basically
On Tue, 23 Oct 2001 01:41, Matt Armstrong wrote:
On Fri, Oct 19, 2001 at 02:10:02PM -0500, Warren Turkal wrote:
Why not just create a symlink to a device node /dev/flipit and
just link it to the right file.
Why/how would that help?
Then /etc/flipit.conf could just always have
Matt Armstrong wrote:
In general, I'm confused about non-conffile stuff going in /etc.
People are used to editing whatever they want to in /etc. It seems
like if a package is going to take over a given file (e.g. an
/etc/flipit/port symlink), then it should not be in /etc but in /var
that help?
Julian
Then /etc/flipit.conf could just always have /dev/flipit, and the
package's maintainer scripts would control where /dev/flipit pointed
to.
Yuck, yuck, yuck, yuck.
Let /etc/flipit.conf just be the symlink or contents directly and not
be a conffile. Where's the big
On Mon, 22 Oct 2001, Matt Armstrong wrote:
In general, I'm confused about non-conffile stuff going in /etc.
If it is a configuration file, it belongs in /etc. If it is a conffile
(i.e., a dpkg-managed configuration file), it cannot be modified in any way
by maintainer scripts.
This basically
program (http://www.lickey.com/flipit/) and have a
question about configuration files.
Section 11.7.3 of the Debian Policy Manual states that the configuration
files in /etc must be left alone by the maintainer scripts if it is
marked a conffile:
The easy way to achieve
of the Debian Policy Manual states that the configuration
files in /etc must be left alone by the maintainer scripts if it is
marked a conffile:
The easy way to achieve this behavior is to make the configuration
file a conffile. This is appropriate only if it is possible
Matt Armstrong [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Julian Gilbey [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Fri, Oct 19, 2001 at 02:10:02PM -0500, Warren Turkal wrote:
Why not just create a symlink to a device node /dev/flipit and just
link it to the right file.
Why/how would that help?
Then
program (http://www.lickey.com/flipit/) and have a
question about configuration files.
Section 11.7.3 of the Debian Policy Manual states that the configuration
files in /etc must be left alone by the maintainer scripts if it is
marked a conffile:
The easy way to achieve this behavior
of the Debian Policy Manual states that the configuration
files in /etc must be left alone by the maintainer scripts if it is
marked a conffile:
The easy way to achieve this behavior is to make the configuration
file a conffile. This is appropriate only if it is possible
- /dev/whatever.
In general, I'm confused about non-conffile stuff going in /etc.
People are used to editing whatever they want to in /etc. It seems
like if a package is going to take over a given file (e.g. an
/etc/flipit/port symlink), then it should not be in /etc but in /var
or somewhere else
Warren Turkal [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Why not just create a symlink to a device node /dev/flipit and just
link it to the right file.
Warren
Yes, I think that is a good idea.
--
matt
of the Debian Policy Manual states that the configuration
files in /etc must be left alone by the maintainer scripts if it is
marked a conffile:
The easy way to achieve this behavior is to make the configuration
file a conffile. This is appropriate only if it is possible
Warren Turkal [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Why not just create a symlink to a device node /dev/flipit and just
link it to the right file.
Warren
Yes, I think that is a good idea.
--
matt
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL
of the Debian Policy Manual states that the configuration
files in /etc must be left alone by the maintainer scripts if it is
marked a conffile:
The easy way to achieve this behavior is to make the configuration
file a conffile. This is appropriate only if it is possible
On Thu, Oct 18, 2001 at 08:30:28AM -0200, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
No, there's nothing wrong with that, but please consider carefully if the
dependency is worth it, as it will mean bringing a little-used language
support into all systems that need your package.
You just need a
Julian Gilbey [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Tue, Oct 16, 2001 at 10:46:52PM -0600, Matt Armstrong wrote:
Who needs to edit it, the sysadmin or the maintainer scripts?
- I really do want to make it a conffile, so the user is notified of
future options.
There are other ways to do
On Wed, 17 Oct 2001, Matt Armstrong wrote:
1) Does Debian have any useful packaging utilities used for simple
programmatic editing of text files? I'm not thinking sed/awk/perl
I think not. The code is there, but scattered over a thousand packages and
in different incarnations as every
On Thu, Oct 18, 2001 at 08:30:28AM -0200, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
No, there's nothing wrong with that, but please consider carefully if the
dependency is worth it, as it will mean bringing a little-used language
support into all systems that need your package.
You just need a
On Wed, 17 Oct 2001 06:46, Matt Armstrong wrote:
- Policy forbids me from editing the /etc/flipit.conf if I mark it a
conffile.
- The program won't work if /etc/flipit.conf isn't edited.
- I really do want to make it a conffile, so the user is notified of
future
Matt Armstrong wrote:
- I really do want to make it a conffile, so the user is notified of
future options.
I don't follow this point. The user will only be informed that the
conffile has changed if they have modified it in some way and you change
the conffile that's distributed
I'm packaging my own program (http://www.lickey.com/flipit/) and have a
question about configuration files.
Section 11.7.3 of the Debian Policy Manual states that the configuration
files in /etc must be left alone by the maintainer scripts if it is
marked a conffile:
The easy way to achieve
So I'm left in a situation where:
- Policy forbids me from editing the /etc/flipit.conf if I mark it a
conffile.
- The program won't work if /etc/flipit.conf isn't edited.
- I really do want to make it a conffile, so the user is notified of
future options
On Wed, 17 Oct 2001 06:46, Matt Armstrong wrote:
- Policy forbids me from editing the /etc/flipit.conf if I mark it a
conffile.
- The program won't work if /etc/flipit.conf isn't edited.
- I really do want to make it a conffile, so the user is notified of
future
Russell Coker wrote:
OK. So you install a file and then customise it to the user. IMHO
customising the file on first install does not count as editing a conf file
as you are just changing what the user will see as the default config.
In your opinion mabe, but not according to policy.
Matt Armstrong wrote:
- I really do want to make it a conffile, so the user is notified of
future options.
I don't follow this point. The user will only be informed that the
conffile has changed if they have modified it in some way and you change
the conffile that's distributed
it a
conffile.
Correct.
- The program won't work if /etc/flipit.conf isn't edited.
Who needs to edit it, the sysadmin or the maintainer scripts?
- I really do want to make it a conffile, so the user is notified of
future options.
There are other ways to do this -- see below.
- I
I'm packaging my own program (http://www.lickey.com/flipit/) and have a
question about configuration files.
Section 11.7.3 of the Debian Policy Manual states that the configuration
files in /etc must be left alone by the maintainer scripts if it is
marked a conffile:
The easy way to achieve
So I'm left in a situation where:
- Policy forbids me from editing the /etc/flipit.conf if I mark it a
conffile.
- The program won't work if /etc/flipit.conf isn't edited.
- I really do want to make it a conffile, so the user is notified of
future options
35 matches
Mail list logo
