On Fri, Feb 20 2009, Jörg Sommer wrote:
> I'm packaging etcgit [1], a system to manage configuration files in /etc
> with git, similar to etckeeper. Etcgit tracks the original version of all
> files and therefore, I have to wrap ucf to get the original version and
> stop ucf from doing anything. The script [2] is mainly this:
Shouldn't etcgit be tracking the current state as well as the
original versions?
Also, I am not sure that this is valid. ucf is merely a toll
for the administrator to select what the local configuration file
contains; and as such is logically similar to vi or emacs. If you are
nto planning on wrapping vi-and-variants, and various emacsen, why wrap
ucf?
> save_original
> merge_with_current
> export UCF_FORCE_CONFFOLD=1
NAK.
I think this is wrong. This essentially says that ucf should
never present the new config file to the user, even if keeping the old
configuration files breaks the system. If the user/maintainer decides
to shoot themselves in the foot it is onething, but ucf should never
set this as the default.
> run_real_ucf "$@"
> rm "$file".ucf-dist
>
> As the Debian policy requests, I write to you to tell you about my plan
> and ask for your approval.
I think this should be discussed on -devel, not just between us.
> [1] http://git.debian.org/?p=users/jo-guest/etcgit.git;a=summary
> [2]
> http://git.debian.org/?p=users/jo-guest/etcgit.git;a=blob;f=ucf-wrapper;hb=HEAD
manoj
--
I hate dying. Dave Johnson
Manoj Srivastava <sriva...@debian.org> <http://www.debian.org/~srivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
