Hi dbconfig-common-devel followers,
You may have noticed that I have been discussing behavior of
dbconfig-common on debian-devel [1] related to bug 720517 [2].
I want to solve the bug, but I am unsure on how to handle the situation.
So lets discuss the issue:
dbconfig-common can receive the request from a package to set
ownership/perms for a configuration file it manages (via
dbc_generate_include_owner and dbc_generate_include_perms). The problem
is that dbconfig-common does not know if this request from the package
to set ownership and perms is the result of default package behavior, or
after consulting the admin about what they want. Now comes the problem:
dbconfig-common should set these ownership/perms when the admin has
asked for it, but should respect current ownership/perms if the
requested ownership/perms are just a default from the package (as per
Policy).
Any ideas how to solve this? Investigate all packages to check for their
behavior (does any package query the admin about this?)? If no package
is actively setting this, I believe we can change the behavior of
dbconfig-common to only change the ownership/perms on creation, but
ignore it during update. Of course documentation needs to be updated to
reflect this if we go that way. If at least one package queries the
admin, I don't see a generic solution except for agreeing on desired
behavior and filing bugs against the packages that don't match that
behavior.
The relevant scripts in the dbconfig-common source are:
dpkg/common
dbconfig-generate-include
Paul
[1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2014/10/msg00084.html
[2] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=720517
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
