On Du, 15 dec 19, 18:50:23, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > > I don't understand what you mean gets "activated by default": By default > no custom file exists, and therefore none is "activated".
Right. > Reason I prefer having that entry uncommented by default is to not need > editing main file when adding a custom file. Main file is a conffile so > the fewer situations it needs editing the better. Oh, didn't think about it being a conffile, so yes, I agree. > > For me it would make more sense to add some more variables to generate > > different entries, e.g. something like U_BOOT_ALT_ROOT (alternative > > root file system for which to generate entries). > > Sorry, I don't understand what you are saying here. Seems to you are > switching topic to discuss something else, is that correct? Let me rephrase that. As I see it, the custom entries are potentially dangerous (unbootable system, security, etc.) so it made sense for me to have them under several "layers" of "protection". I was suggesting that instead of having it enabled by default in the configuration to provide the admin with additional switches for "common" customizations[1], that might make it unnecessary to use this bigger hammer at all. Of course, as you mentioned above, with /etc/default/u-boot being a conffile this tends to make the admin's life harder than it should. I'll rework the patch accordingly, probably sometimes this week. [1] Not sure how common it is, but my motivation for this was to have an entry with a different root file system that is not overwritten on every update, hence my example above. I might come up with a patch implementing U_BOOT_ALT_ROOT as well, if I don't have anything better to do ;) Kind regards, Andrei -- http://wiki.debian.org/FAQsFromDebianUser
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
