On 2011-12-22 16:30:57 +0100, Tom H wrote:
> You can check whether a file in "/etc/default/" is sourced by a file
> in "/etc/init.d/".
It's impossible to do this reliably (e.g. recursively), and the
/etc/default/ file may be sourced by another script.
For instance, /etc/default/cryptdisks is not
On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 4:23 AM, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> On 2011-12-20 14:20:51 -0700, Bob Proulx wrote:
>>
>> But I think this discussion of /etc/default/ collisions is all rather
>> academic. No one has yet to mention any real world case of a problem.
>> Just the potential that it might be a p
On 2011-12-20 14:20:51 -0700, Bob Proulx wrote:
> But I think this discussion of /etc/default/ collisions is all rather
> academic. No one has yet to mention any real world case of a problem.
> Just the potential that it might be a problem. Unless it is a real
> problem, and I haven't seen it yet
Hi,
On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 11:06:04PM +0200, Andrei Popescu wrote:
> On Ma, 20 dec 11, 20:56:11, Osamu Aoki wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 12:29:01AM +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> > > The point is what the Debian Policy says.
> >
> > Anyway, if you feel strong to enforce this ipart of pol
Andrei Popescu wrote:
> Osamu Aoki wrote:
> > Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> > > The point is what the Debian Policy says.
> >
> > Anyway, if you feel strong to enforce this ipart of policy, most
> > effective thing to do is file a wishlist bug with patch to lintian to
> > enforce for both init.d scri
On Ma, 20 dec 11, 20:56:11, Osamu Aoki wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 12:29:01AM +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> > The point is what the Debian Policy says.
>
> Anyway, if you feel strong to enforce this ipart of policy, most
> effective thing to do is file a wishlist bug with patch to lintian
On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 12:29:01AM +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> The point is what the Debian Policy says.
Anyway, if you feel strong to enforce this ipart of policy, most
effective thing to do is file a wishlist bug with patch to lintian to
enforce for both init.d script and default file.
I
Hi,
On 2011-12-19 23:02:07 +0900, Osamu Aoki wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 01:02:22AM +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> > On 2011-12-18 13:18:02 -0700, Bob Proulx wrote:
> > > The namespace is defined by Debian Policy. The filename should be
> > > named after the package name. Since the package
Hi,
On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 01:02:22AM +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> On 2011-12-18 13:18:02 -0700, Bob Proulx wrote:
> > The namespace is defined by Debian Policy. The filename should be
> > named after the package name. Since the package names must be
> > different the file name derived from
On 2011-12-18 21:20:06 -0700, Bob Proulx wrote:
> Well... We are all friends here. Have you hit a problem with one of
> them? I am sure something could be worked out.
No problems with /etc/default yet. But I think that it would have
been preferable to avoid problems that could arise in the futu
Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> Bob Proulx wrote:
> > Okay I was wrong on the strictly exact names. But most of those do
> > exist within the expected namespace of the parent package. The only
> > ones that are a stretch are devpts and tmpfs. The others are pretty
> > obvious.
>
> But this not suffici
On 2011-12-18 17:09:35 -0700, Bob Proulx wrote:
> Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> > /etc/default/alsa created by alsa-base
> > /etc/default/apache2 created by apache2.2-common
> > /etc/default/bluetooth created by bluez
> > /etc/default/bootlogd created by initscripts
> > /etc/default/cacerts created by c
Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> Bob Proulx wrote:
> > The namespace is defined by Debian Policy. The filename should be
> > named after the package name. Since the package names must be
> > different the file name derived from it must be different. (I think
> > it is okay for /etc/default/foo to be par
On 2011-12-18 13:18:02 -0700, Bob Proulx wrote:
> The namespace is defined by Debian Policy. The filename should be
> named after the package name. Since the package names must be
> different the file name derived from it must be different. (I think
> it is okay for /etc/default/foo to be part o
Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> Bob Proulx wrote:
> > The namespace is defined by Debian Policy. The filename should be
> > named after the package name. Since the package names must be
> > different the file name derived from it must be different. (I think
> > it is okay for /etc/default/foo to be par
On 2011-12-18 13:18:02 -0700, Bob Proulx wrote:
> The namespace is defined by Debian Policy. The filename should be
> named after the package name. Since the package names must be
> different the file name derived from it must be different. (I think
> it is okay for /etc/default/foo to be part o
Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> Bob Proulx wrote:
> > Sometimes I see people file bugs to the BTS against a package asking
> > for the package to provide a /etc/default/ file as part of the
> > package. When I see those I usually counter with a request that it
> > not be made part of the package. If the
On 2011-12-17 18:55:45 -0700, Bob Proulx wrote:
> Sometimes I see people file bugs to the BTS against a package asking
> for the package to provide a /etc/default/ file as part of the
> package. When I see those I usually counter with a request that it
> not be made part of the package. If the fi
Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> However there are still packages for which neither dpkg -S, nor ucfq
> gives information about the package:
>
> xvii:~> ll /etc/default/ntfs-3g
> -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 48 2011-12-08 00:21:36 /etc/default/ntfs-3g
> xvii:~> dpkg -S /etc/default/ntfs-3g
> dpkg-query: no path
On 2011-12-18 02:11:33 +0100, Michael Biebl wrote:
> On 18.12.2011 01:00, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> > Is there a way to find which package has installed some file
> > under /etc? For conffiles, there is dlocate or "dpkg -S", but
> > what about the other files (inst
On 18.12.2011 01:00, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> Is there a way to find which package has installed some file
> under /etc? For conffiles, there is dlocate or "dpkg -S", but
> what about the other files (installed in postinst)?
ucf is also used to manage configuration files.
As
Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> Is there a way to find which package has installed some file
> under /etc?
Yes, if the package owns the file. No, if the package put it there
but didn't keep ownership of it.
> For conffiles, there is dlocate or "dpkg -S",
Exactly! If the p
Is there a way to find which package has installed some file
under /etc? For conffiles, there is dlocate or "dpkg -S", but
what about the other files (installed in postinst)?
--
Vincent Lefèvre - Web: <http://www.vinc17.net/>
100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <http://
23 matches
Mail list logo
