On 11/03/14 18:17, Jean-Michel Vourgère wrote: > Hello Daniel > > Please read apache2 debian news ( /usr/share/doc/apache2/NEWS.Debian.gz ) >> Moreover, the configuration mechanism in Debian has changed. All >> configurations in sites-enabled and conf-enabled need a ".conf" suffix now. > This mechanism enable packages to deploy their configuration directly in > conf-available without symlinks, while NOT enabling .dpkg-new and similar > files by default. :)
A common pattern in my own installations involves using Include to access the conf files from a virtualhost For example, when packages (pre-Apache2.4) offer me the option to symlink into conf.d I often decline and then I manually edit the virtualhost to Include the conf I realize this can be done just as easily with conf-available though If a package is intended for wheezy-backports, should it be creating /etc/apache2/conf-available? > > Regarding the wiki, assuming you do not want to use dh_apache2, > I can read: >> Install the configuration file to >> /etc/apache2/conf-available/yourapplication.conf. > You do need a .conf extension. Ok, thanks for confirming - the wiki examples do show the extension but I didn't see anything emphasizing it is a mandatory extension now > Also, the wiki is quite explicit about the fact that you should use > "apache2_invoke enconf" and *not* a2enconf directly. Yes, I have been updating my packages slowly and hadn't fully tried all of this yet but loganalyzer, as a new package, will be the first one where I do this properly I ran into other problems too: a) if my postinst or postrm calls apache2_invoke from inside a function, then it fails badly b) some of my postinst and postrm code is based on examples I saw in other packages, they test -x /usr/sbin/apache2 and it turns out this is not a great idea as if somebody does dpkg --remove apache2 loganalyzer dpkg --purge loganalyzer then at the moment the loganalyzer postrm runs with the "purge" argument, there is no /usr/sbin/apache2 and so it does not remove the symlink Also, the check for /usr/share/apache2/apache2-maintscript-helper would also fail if apache2 had been removed - it is OK for the postrm to just proceed without calling apache2_invoke at all if it is no longer there or should the postm complain? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
