On Sat, Jul 17, 1999 at 08:08:36PM +0200, Stefan Gybas wrote:
Why is a program in the package allowed to change a conffile but not
the postinst? The final result is the same: dpkg might ask if I want to
replace the configuration file when I upgrade the package.
I, for example, maintain
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
One comment from the ferret:
Would it make any sense to divide the 'data' section into
main/contrib/non-free, instead of becoming a fourth section alongside
them? I can't think of any examples offhand, but I could see where some
datasets might have restricted
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
On 17 Jul 1999, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
PROPOSAL: Easing the transition from `/usr/doc' to `/usr/share/doc'
---
Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Miquel == Miquel van Smoorenburg [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Miquel It sounds more like you want a rc.local style directory,
Miquel not rc.boot.
Miquel But what is so difficult about update-rc.d? It's only one
Miquel line in the postinst .. (and one in prerm)
It's not
retitle 32448 [ACCEPTED 1999/07/18] Policy should use /etc/rcS.d instead of
/etc/rc.boot
severity 32448 normal
forwarded 32448 debian-policy@lists.debian.org
thanks
Policy still suggests /etc/rc.boot instead of /etc/rcS.d (#32448)
* Under discussion.
* Proposed on 26 Jan 1999 by Brian
A few questions on the wording of this, but once those are clarified,
I will second the proposal.
4.7.1. Definitions
--
configuration file
A file that affects the operation of program, or provides site-
or host-specific information, or otherwise
Seconded.
Julian
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Julian Gilbey, Dept of Maths, QMW, Univ. of London. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Debian GNU/Linux Developer, see http://www.debian.org/~jdg
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
retitle 32448 [ACCEPTED 1999/07/18] Policy should use /etc/rcS.d instead of
/etc/rc.boot
Bug#32448: [PROPOSED] Policy should suggest /etc/rcS.d instead of /etc/rc.boot
Changed bug title.
severity 32448 normal
Bug#32448: [ACCEPTED 1999/07/18] Policy
Package: debian-policy
Version: 3.0.0.0
Severity: wishlist
Section 3.3 currently makes reference to /etc/rc?.d as containing
symlinks to the scripts in /etc/init.d, and a detailed description of
how init uses them. It goes on, in section 3.3.3, to say:
A program is provided, `update-rc.d', to
On Tue, Jul 13, 1999 at 10:15:42AM -0700, Joseph Carter wrote:
Personally I think /usr/src/linux should GO AWAY. Every sysadmin worth
their salt uses /usr/src/linux-version or similar with a symlink pointing
back for compatibility. It's only common sense that you don't throw away
the old
On Fri, Jul 16, 1999 at 02:35:04PM -0700, Joey Hess wrote:
Data section (#38902)
* Proposed on 3 Jun 1999 by Darren O. Benham; seconded by Peter S
Galbraith, Peter Makholm and Peter Makholm.
I hate to say this but I think my involvment in this proposal is
cursed. In the beginning I
On Sun, Jul 18, 1999 at 02:45:04AM +0100, Julian Gilbey wrote:
Do you know of any conffiles which are not configuration files? The
concept of a conffile which is not a configuration file is bizarre.
/etc/init.d/* and /etc/cron.d/* are not really configuration files for
the programs in the
On Sun, Jul 18, 1999 at 12:44:17PM +0200, Stefan Gybas wrote:
So if this update-inetd program modifies a conffile, I am not allowed to
call it from my postinst? What's the reason for such a program then?
inetd.conf is _not_ a conffile. Actually, dpkg does not know about it at all:
[9:16pm]
Programs which need to refer to all Debian docs should then still be
pointing to /usr/doc, until the migration is nearly complete. I'm talking
about apache ( /doc/ ), dhelp, etc.
Hamish Moffatt wrote:
inetd.conf is _not_ a conffile.
Ok, now I understand. In a previous mail you once wrote conffile
when you probably meant configuration file which is not a conffile and
this was causing somy of my confusion. Sorry for this!
--
Stefan Gybas
Steve Greenland wrote:
What Hamish was pointing out is that it's okay to use emacs or vi or
icepref to modify configuration files and even conffiles. The policy
proposal was in no way meant to imply that you can't write programs to
modify conffiles (either general or specific), just that they
On 17-Jul-99, 20:45 (CDT), Julian Gilbey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Note that a script that embeds configuration information (such as most
of the files in `/etc/init.d' and `/etc/cron.{hourly,weekly,monthly}')
is de-facto a configuration file and should be treated as such.
17 matches
Mail list logo
