On Fri, 19 Dec 1997, Santiago Vila wrote: > Policy Manual 3.4.5 says: > > Do not include the /etc/rcn.d/* symbolic links in dpkg's conffiles > list! This will cause problems! Do, however, include the /etc/init.d > scripts in conffiles. > > However, it does not say why /etc/init.d/* scripts have to be conffiles. > They are usually programs, not configuration files. > > Could somebody please explain the rationale for having *all* > /etc/init.d/* scripts as conffiles? > > Please, don't say "you can deactivate the service by modifying the > scripts", since we already can deactivate the service by uninstalling the > package, and the *real* configuration files will remember how exactly do > we want the services to be activated again when we install the package > again.
You can deactivate OR CHANGE THE BEHAVIOR of the program by modifying the script. If it isn't a conffile, this will break every time the package is upgraded (I frequently tweak the behavior of the init.d scripts). I know I'd get seriously annoyed if my changes were suddenly overridden. The only inconvenience there is the occasional prompting about a file I've changed being updated. I far prefer that small warning to having programs change behavior under my nose. You only got the warning because a package was changed to conform to policy and added a conffile that wasn't there. For the most part, dpkg does a good job of not bothering you about files that you haven't changed or which haven't changed upstream. -- Scott K. Ellis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.gate.net/~storm/
