Thibaut Paumard wrote: > > > I suppose you mean: > bacula: usr-share-doc-symlink-without-dependency > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=554197 > > The idea is to delete the directory in order to replace it by a symlink. That's the one, thank you.
> In my opinion, it is OK to do that because: > sysadmins should not do that. granted, but should a backup program start out by erasing files unconditionally ? : ) > In essence, there is a provision in the Debian policy so that it's > harmless for sysadmins to REMOVE files from /usr/share/doc, not to ADD > files there. But it's not explicited, one could argue strict logic and add that this sentence as an encouragement for admins to start customising their doc/. > > Besides, the rm -f is there precisely to remove supplementary files that > can only be there only if the sysadmin has put them here. So it's a bit > of a no-go to check whether the directory is empty before you > force-delete it... My idea was to move it some place safe, not abort the operation. However unlikely it is for an operator to store his files in there, I'm still a little wary of packaging a backup program that can start out by erasing unmanaged files unconditionally. > > Regards, Thibaut. > > -- Lucas B. Cohen "The question of whether a computer can think is no more interesting than the question of whether a submarine can swim." - Edgar W. Dijkstra -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
