Hi,
Some more thoughts.
/etc/kernel-img.conf is a shared configuration file -- any
number of kernel image and mkvmlinux packages that use that file may
be installed pr going to be installed on the machine. Not all
supported packages are official packages either -- anyone may compile
their own custom kernel.
Policy states that to modify shared configuration files one
sets up a special owner package that creates update mechanisms that
preserve user changes, and provides this mechanism for other
packages.
So, what can be the owner of the configuration file
/etc/kernel-img.conf? Certainly no kernel image package can be, since
kernel image packages come and they go, but /etc/kernel-img.conf
lives on.
Also, how does one know when the file contains user changes
are not? On my machine, I hand edited in the postinst_hook line, so
changing that line is indeed not preserving user changes. You may
cry that the user changes are wrong, and would not work anymore, and
I would concede the point -- and yet, that is what policy says.
It would be ironic if a change made to satisfy one part of
policy ends up having to violate another part of policy.
Arguably, the right way to handle this transition is to
provide a compatibility symlink until Etch +1, when the
kernel-package with the old behaviour would belong to Oldstable. At
which point, in Etch+1, one can do away with the transition symlink
in /sbin/update-grub.
manoj
--
Dyslexia means never having to say that you're ysror.
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
