On Wed, 17 Dec 2014, Santiago Vila wrote:
Sorry but I don't follow your line of reasoning.
In those examples, the file 10-ssl.conf has SSL certificates by
default.
The point is that the code to do that was broken.
But I'm not proposing that the default 10-ssl.conf has SSL enabled
anymore. Everything I ask is that we avoid useless prompts in
upgrades, which is what this bug is about, and it's also what policy
says we should do.
So: Why can't dovecot-core create the *current* file (the one *not*
having SSL enabled) in the postinst instead of using UCF? Please don't
tell me that you already tried that, because you have not.
No I haven't but tell me how I am ensure that that people who have
modified that file do not see their changes get destroyed. When you cover
all the use cases I bet you fill find that ucf has been reinvented--badly
no doubt.
This would solve the problem of UCF asking the same question over and
over again on upgrades. Why can't you do that? Using UCF for a file
that everybody should change does not make any sense!
people who want SSL != everybody. People who want SSL in one particular
configuration != everyone who wants SSL. That's the whole problem.
--
Jaldhar H. Vyas <jald...@debian.org>
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
