Hi dbconfig-common-devel followers, You may have noticed that I have been discussing behavior of dbconfig-common on debian-devel [1] related to bug 720517 [2].
I want to solve the bug, but I am unsure on how to handle the situation. So lets discuss the issue: dbconfig-common can receive the request from a package to set ownership/perms for a configuration file it manages (via dbc_generate_include_owner and dbc_generate_include_perms). The problem is that dbconfig-common does not know if this request from the package to set ownership and perms is the result of default package behavior, or after consulting the admin about what they want. Now comes the problem: dbconfig-common should set these ownership/perms when the admin has asked for it, but should respect current ownership/perms if the requested ownership/perms are just a default from the package (as per Policy). Any ideas how to solve this? Investigate all packages to check for their behavior (does any package query the admin about this?)? If no package is actively setting this, I believe we can change the behavior of dbconfig-common to only change the ownership/perms on creation, but ignore it during update. Of course documentation needs to be updated to reflect this if we go that way. If at least one package queries the admin, I don't see a generic solution except for agreeing on desired behavior and filing bugs against the packages that don't match that behavior. The relevant scripts in the dbconfig-common source are: dpkg/common dbconfig-generate-include Paul [1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2014/10/msg00084.html [2] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=720517
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
