Ian Jackson wrote:
> In fact, it is _configuration files_ and not just conffiles which are
> (or should be) removed on purge.
You're right.
> > 4.2
> >
> > The configuration files `/etc/services', `/etc/protocols', and
> > `/etc/rpc' are managed by the netbase package and may not be m
Joey Hess writes, suggesting some places where he feels `configuration
file' should read `conffile':
> 3.4.2:
>
> These scripts should not fail obscurely when the configuration files
> remain but the package has been removed, as the default in dpkg is to
> leave configuration files
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
On 24 Feb 1998, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Could I get an interpretaion of the policy on this message,
> point by point? (I mean that. I have put thought into these
> questions, I merely ask for the courtesy of some thought in the
> responses). Please pardon the redundancy,
Guy Maor wrote:
> > This leaves you with a huge postinst file (probably 2x the size of the
> > actual file it generates), sitting in /var/lib/dpkg/info/. IMHO, worse than
> > just installing a copy of the file into /usr/lib/
>
> gzip + uuencode.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/debian/build/lambdacore-02feb97
Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Zed Pobre wrote:
> > Shar-utils.
Or perl doing uuencode.
> This leaves you with a huge postinst file (probably 2x the size of the
> actual file it generates), sitting in /var/lib/dpkg/info/. IMHO, worse than
> just installing a copy of the file into /u
Hi,
Thanks, Joey. There is at least some vindication about why I
felt thtat configuration file == conffile, the policy manual
is also confused as well. (so much for it is boviously clear they are
different things)
I still contend, with these as proof, that the original intent
Hi,
Could I get an interpretaion of the policy on this message,
point by point? (I mean that. I have put thought into these
questions, I merely ask for the courtesy of some thought in the
responses). Please pardon the redundancy, I think I feel strongly on
this issue.
Joey Hess wrote:
> The problem with this that have came up during this discussion was
> that some packages have files like this, that are a few MB in size
> (ie, the lambdamoo database, the dosemu hdimage). These files are
> obviously way to big to be generated by the postinst. Manoj made
> severa
Zed Pobre wrote:
> Actually, I was thinking of the way that I received my first copy
> of Nethack years and years ago and was wondering if maybe those files
> *aren't* too big to be generated by the postinst.
> Shar-utils.
> Even if it's a binary, it can be packaged up by uudecode, cat
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
On Tue, 24 Feb 1998, Joey Hess wrote:
> The problem with this that have came up during this discussion was that
> some packages have files like this, that are a few MB in size (ie, the
> lambdamoo database, the dosemu hdimage). These files are obviously way to b
Hi,
>>"Rob" == Rob Browning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Rob> Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> I think I disagree. Letting developers who can't write shell
>> scripts can in no way be in the interests of the project, one of
>> whose goals is *excellence*.
Rob> Sure it can. It depen
Christian Schwarz wrote:
> Comments are appreciated. If you think that some sections in the manuals
> should be clarified, please tell me exact sentences which you find
> `confusing'.
3.4.2:
These scripts should not fail obscurely when the configuration files
remain but the package has
Christian Schwarz wrote:
> 2. I'm wondering why it's so hard for people to get the difference between
> configuration files and conffiles. Perhaps, the name "conffiles" is not a
> good name (but either way, it's unlikely that we'll change the name
> because this would be a _lot_ of work). Here is m
Let me just throw in a few notes:
(1. I'm in the process of taking over the maintenance of the Packaging
Manual. I'll release this as a new package as soon as the dpkg package is
released.)
2. I'm wondering why it's so hard for people to get the difference between
configuration files and conffil
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I think I disagree. Letting developers who can't write shell
> scripts can in no way be in the interests of the project, one of
> whose goals is *excellence*.
Sure it can. It depends on what they're doing. You don't have to be
a good shell pr
Hi,
Ok, that's it. You said the same thing about me on IRC, and I
let it go. But in this forum, I feel I should respond. I resent the
implication that I am a bare boned minimalist hick who is not upto
date on tools and modern software.
I would have preferred to not voice this o
Hi,
>>"Guy" == Guy Maor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Guy> Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> In my opinion, I would ask for conffiles to be exactly the set of
>> configuration files, plus exceptions decided by consensus no the
>> mailing lists
Guy> That's a bit much. I agree that con
Hi,
>>"Adam" == Adam P Harris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Adam> Manoj, you miss the point that creating conditions where errors
Adam> are possible makes errors inevitable, statistically speaking,
Adam> for these errors to occur. Crippling, nasty errors.
And removing the possibility of er
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> In my opinion, I would ask for conffiles to be exactly the set
> of configuration files, plus exceptions decided by consensus no the
> mailing lists
That's a bit much. I agree that conffiles are a proper subset of
configuration files, but ma
Hi,
>>"Zed" == Zed Pobre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Zed> I think that mindset is not in the best interests of the Debian
Zed> project.
>> I think I disagree. Letting developers who can't write shell
>> scripts can in no way be in the interests of the project, one of
>> whose goals is *excellenc
: Zed> After having lurked in debian-devel for a while, I suspect that
: Zed> Manoj will object that developers for Debian need to be sufficiently
: Zed> proficient in writing shell scripts and whatever else that they can
: Zed> deal with this on their own.
: ;-)
: Zed> I think that mindset
[You (Manoj Srivastava)]
>Zed> After having lurked in debian-devel for a while, I suspect that
>Zed> Manoj will object that developers for Debian need to be sufficiently
>Zed> proficient in writing shell scripts and whatever else that they can
>Zed> deal with this on their own.
>Zed> I think that
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Zed> I think that mindset is not in the best interests of the Debian
> Zed> project.
>
> I think I disagree. Letting developers who can't write shell
> scripts can in no way be in the interests of the project, one of
> whose goals is *excellence*.
Zed> - Files listed as conffiles are still constrained by any other
Zed> rules that may apply to them; e.g. configuration files that
Zed> are conffiles must still go in /etc, variable data files
Zed> still go in /var, and so forth.
Hmmm. Ok.
Zed> Af
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> > It has been proposed that that is not the case, that conffiles
> > are an independent classification.
> >
> > If that is the case, then under one interpretation (a) becomes
> > meaningless, since it only applies to the small subset of files that
> >
Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> I would like to request a discussion about Configuration files
> and the conffiles mechanism. We knwo the following:
>
> a) Any configuration file required or created by a package has to
> reside in /etc (POLICY 3.3.7)
> b) Most configuration files under /etc
Hi,
I would like to request a discussion about Configuration files
and the conffiles mechanism. We knwo the following:
a) Any configuration file required or created by a package has to
reside in /etc (POLICY 3.3.7)
b) Most configuration files under /etc [where else could they be?]
28 matches
Mail list logo
