On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 04:18:13PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote [edted]: > I would suggest disallowing example entries altogether; let packages use the > '#<off>#' syntax instead. Or is there some reason I'm missing why we would > want to support so many different ways for packages to add lines to > update-inetd?
I'm all for simplicity, so by all means let's disallow example entries. - If a package wants to install an example entry into `/etc/inetd.conf', - the entry must be preceded with exactly one hash character (`#'). - Such lines are treated as "commented out by user" by the - `update-inetd' script and are not changed or activated during package - updates. + Lines preceded with exactly one hash character (`#') are treated as + "commented out by user" by the `update-inetd' script and must not be + changed or activated during package updates. The case of example entries is beyond the scope of policy. update-inetd can easily get a new ``--add-disabled'' switch (which will be identical to ``--add'' except for prefixing the entry with '#<off># '). -S -- debtags-organised WNPP bugs: http://members.hellug.gr/serzan/wnpp -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-policy-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org