Hi,
For my part, I am quite happy with this interpretation of the
policy; I think it makes sense, and is internally consistent. I am
cutting down the posting to the relevant bits (I asked the same
question multiple times, and christian responded to all of them).
I think this should be distilled down, debated upon, and the
resulting clarifications put into policy.
manoj
>>"Christian" == Christian Schwarz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Christian> But the main point is: A file being CFGF is a
Christian> characteristic which is defined by the program which reads
Christian> the file, while being CF is just a certain `label' the
Christian> maintainer puts onto a file to tell dpkg to be carefully
Christian> when upgrading that file.
Christian> I'm thinking of the following criteria:
Christian> 1. The file is usually modified by the system
Christian> administrator.
Christian> 2. It's legal to modify that file according to the FSSTND.
Christian> 3. The package provides a `default version' of the file.
Christian> According to #2, all CFs must be in a `writable' directory
Christian> like /etc, or /var--no CFs may be in /usr, for example.
Christian> configuration file (CFGF): a file that may be changed by
Christian> the local system administrator to adjust a program to her
Christian> needs.
Christian> It's true, that most CFGFs are CFs, but there might be
Christian> exceptions: Tagging a file CF is just to tell dpkg to take
Christian> special care of the file during upgrades. However, the
Christian> package might implement its own `CF mechanism' which might
Christian> be adjusted for the special case of the package. In this
Christian> case, the CFGF would not be tagged CF.
Christian> (The other question would be: Are there CFs which are not
Christian> CFGFs? I can't think of any examples... :)
I agree.
>> So, conffiles are not meant for the local sys admin to change to
>> modify the behaviour of programs?
Christian> Yes, I guess all CFs are CFGFs. (But not the other way
Christian> around!)
I agree.
Christian> The criteria of the terms are `orthogonal', since CF is a
Christian> `label' and CFGF is a `characteristic.' However, since in
Christian> practise these two aspects occur at once, they don't look
Christian> very `orthogonal'. But I think they are `independent' :)
Christian> (Hope, that these mathematical terms don't raise more
Christian> confusion as we already have! ;-)
I like that.
>> why are all conffiles also not configuration files?
Christian> I guess they are (or at least, should be :).
>> Why are conffiles not a proper subset of configuration files?
Christian> I think they are.
Christian> Since CF is a subset of CFGF, this definition carries over
Christian> from CF to CFGF.
--
"It's a hundred and six miles to Chicago, we've got a full tank of
gas, half a pack of cigarettes, it's dark, and we're wearing
sunglasses." "Hit it." Jake and Elwood Blues
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://www.datasync.com/%7Esrivasta/>
Key C7261095 fingerprint = CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
