-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Kai, the discussion already ended (I think), but now that you ask, I
would like to answer:
Policy says so because they are useful to modify. What is so hard to
understand about this?
I failed to see why some people can say they are *all* useful to modify
On Fri, Dec 19, 1997 at 01:56:35PM -0500, Scott Ellis wrote:
On Fri, 19 Dec 1997, Santiago Vila wrote:
[snip policy]
Could somebody please explain the rationale for having *all*
/etc/init.d/* scripts as conffiles?
[snip]
You can deactivate OR CHANGE THE BEHAVIOR of the program by
On Sat, 20 Dec 1997, Santiago Vila wrote:
On Sat, 20 Dec 1997, Scott K. Ellis wrote:
[...] stopping these files from being conffiles will
No. This is the most common misunderstanding: I'm *not* saying they
should *all* have to stop being conffiles. I'm saying that they should
be
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
On Sat, 20 Dec 1997, Scott K. Ellis wrote:
The policy does not explain why they should *all* be conffiles.
I can think of a reason to modify almost any /etc/init.d/* script, on the
grounds that they effect the startup behavior of the system.
/sbin/init
Perhaps they should be conffiles, and folks should be told about
`ediff' editting with emacs. I usually say N when it asks, then go
to an XEmacs and do [Tools | Compare | Two Files...] and merge the
new into the old, if appropriate. If you want a one button computer,
buy a Mac.
What's it
On Fri, Dec 19 1997 20:37 GMT Adrian Bridgett writes:
What about dpkg-divert? Sure - some people do edit /etc/init.d/whatever
(particularly network), however there are many files in /etc/init.d that
the vast majority of people won't change. If some behaviour needs to change,
they may not
David Frey [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
AFAIK, dpkg does only ask when the md5sum of the conffile changed. So if it
didn't
change, you get the old version.
dpkg asks when the md5sums of both versions - the one on your system
and the one in the package - change.
Guy
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
This came from bug #16058.
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
On Dec 19, Santiago Vila [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Could somebody please explain the rationale for having *all*
/etc/init.d/* scripts as conffiles?
I find useful to modify some of the scripts. (e.g. I don't need RPC and I
use different command line options for sendmail.)
--
ciao,
Marco
9 matches
Mail list logo
