Joseph Carter wrote: > What does one do in a situation where two packages both provide the same > conffile? Currently they use different names for the file, but both > packages can (and probably should) use the same file. How should this be > handled, both from a policy and from an implementation standpoint? > > I could create the file in postinst if it doesn't exist, but this seems like > a Bad Idea<tm> for many reasons. Is there really no Right Way to do this > except to leave them as two seperate files and have the user deal with it > however they will?
I'm not sure how dpkg handles conffiles plus diversions, but that seems like the logical way to do it - both packages contain the file, and one of them diverts the other package's file out of the way. -- see shy jo -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]