severity 404861 important thanks On Fri 29 Dec 2006, Frank K?ster wrote: > Vincent Lefevre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On 2006-12-28 21:03:57 +0100, Paul Slootman wrote: > >> This is I think a question of interpretation; > >> if the local change modifies the way the package works in any way, then > >> I agree; but a comment?! Where does it end? Do you want upgrades to > >> preserve the mtime of the configuration file as well? How about the > >> filesize, if that was changed locally? > > > > A comment can contain valuable information. For instance, the admin > > could add a note about why he set some value. > > Indeed. However, this information is still available in the backup > file. > > > IMHO, comments should > > be preserved, > > Often this is possible using sed on the configuration file.
The thing is, upstream provides a quite complicated perl script to handle the upgrades; and that script is pretty good at doing that, apart from the fact that comments aren't preserved. It will be very difficult to make it preserve comments, if not impossible. > > If really you can't preserve the comments, it must be said at the > > beginning of the configuration file. > > That would also be a good idea. Agreed. > In summary, I think that wwwoffle's handling of wwwoffle.conf is > suboptimal, but I don't see how this is release-critical. The wording > of Policy and etch_rc_policy.txt is unclear about this, I think, but I > would downgrade this bug to important. OK, sounds reasonable. Paul Slootman -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
