On Sat, 20 Apr 2013, Charles Polisher wrote:
Phil Pennock wrote:
Charles Polisher wrote:
There's an interesting blog post on this -
http://utcc.utoronto.ca/~cks/space/blog/sysadmin/WhyNotEtckeeper?showcomments
which observes that with etckeeper & friends you'll be fighting
your package management system. Some good point/counterpoint in
the comments, too.
If your package management system insists on owning all files in /etc/
and complaining if you choose to change the state of some them by
rolling back a change, then your package management system is broken.
It's acceptable for package management to create new files in /etc/ on
first install but if it wants to own the ongoing state then it's flawed.
Agreed -- Recent "yum update" mysteriously un-installed
/etc/httpd/conf.d/cacti.conf. Still haven't run it
to ground. Not the expected behavior.
Apt has the concept of config files in it's definitions. If the package has
defined a file as a config file, apt will install it on first install, and then
on future updates it will not that the file is different and ask you if you want
the old file, the new file, view a diff of the two, or edit the file yourself.
but if the .deb package doesn't define the conffiles correctly, you have
problems
I don't know what rpm provides that would be similar.
David Lang
_______________________________________________
Tech mailing list
Tech@lists.lopsa.org
https://lists.lopsa.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tech
This list provided by the League of Professional System Administrators
http://lopsa.org/
