On Wed, Jan 29, 2003 at 01:11:22AM +0000, Colin Watson wrote: > On Tue, Feb 05, 2002 at 04:23:30PM -0800, Bill Wohler wrote: > > The old passwd files should be backed up into *.dpkg-old to be > > consistent with other packages. One example of why it is important to > > be consistent, although it might not be explicitly mentioned in the > > Debian Policy Manual (although it should be), is this: After updates, > > I do a "find / -name *.dpkg-*" to see which configuration files have > > been modified. My sanity check would miss your *.org files, which in > > the case of the password files, could have tragic consequences. > > dpkg maintainers: is there any kind of namespace policy on *.dpkg-* > (i.e. is it reserved for conffiles)? It would seem useful if other > packages could use that pattern, since various tools special-case it, > but I thought I'd check.
I had a brief conversation with the dpkg maintainer on IRC: <Kamion> wiggy: did you ever say what you thought about #132530? <wiggy> !linkurl <eunice> http://www.wiggy.net/debdevel.html <wiggy> I don't think I agree with that proposal <wiggy> update-passwd can also be run outside of the maintainer scripts <wiggy> and soon people will want passwd and other tools to use .dpkg-* extensions as well <wiggy> also, I'm pondering getting rid of .dpkg-old <wiggy> or redoing that -- Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
