(While this relates to a specific package, I think my real question is more policy related...)
Can a package install files (via the unpack or a package maintainer script) in a user directory? (I'm not talking about something trn or netscape that creates one or more "user-state" files when it is run.) While I can't find a specific policy item that forbids it, it never occured to me that it was allowed. I suppose I based this assumption on the "don't put any files in /usr/local" rule. The current base-files installs a default .profile and/or a default .bashrc in /root if there is no existing instance. I filed a bug, but the maintainer (Santiago Vila) closed it with the following message: > [explanation of why *snipped*] I believe installing a default .profile > for root that contains a suitable PATH so that root's account is not > broken is not contrary to the policy or their spirit...but I really > think base-files has *good* reasons to install default dotfiles for > root if they do not exist. Well, I disagree, so I thought I would bring it up here to see what others thought. If the consensus is that such behaviour *should* violate policy, then I'll sponsor a "formal" ammendment.
