* Arthur de Jong [2009-04-18 18:51:30 +0200]: > I'm not saying nsswitch.conf should be a conffile. What I'm saying is > that if an admin manually made changes to a file, those changes should > not be automatically undone when some package is removed.
... or installed. > There is no > way for nss-ldapd's postrm to determine if the entries in nsswitch.conf > were put there by an administrator manually or by nss-ldapd's postinst. Indeed. Some other packages have taken the approach of only editing such files if they contain a comment that says something like "delete this line to keep this file from being managed by debconf". > I don't agree with your assessment that nss-ldapd edits nsswitch.conf > unconditionally. The default is to leave nsswitch.conf alone (the > selected defaults for the debconf multiselect) and only edit it if the > admin selected to enable (or disable) ldap through debconf questions. Oh, sorry; I hadn't noticed the parsensswitch() function. > About PAM, actually I understand that PAM module authors are encouraged > to provide information so the modules can be automatically enabled. See: > http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2009/03/msg00003.html A new development I wasn't aware of. Transposed to NSS that would also argue for common conventions and tools to be used by all packages that provide NSS modules. That would certainly be good for consistency, which is what this bug report really is all about. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
