On Tue, 2018-11-27 at 00:30 +0000, Brian wrote: > On Mon 26 Nov 2018 at 17:03:35 -0600, David Wright wrote: > > > On Mon 26 Nov 2018 at 16:31:38 (+0000), Bonno Bloksma wrote: > > > What I just DID notice is that the upgrade replaced ALL nanorc > > > files in the /usr/share/nano/ directory. All ca. 30 default files > > > with timestamp Jul 16 2014 are gone and my default.nanorc file of > > > a later date is gone as well. > > > There are now around 40 files with timestamp Jan 11 2017. > > > > AIUI those files are part of the nano package, so the upgrade > > upgrades > > them. It would be nice if one could substitute one's own foo.nanorc > > file in a location like /etc/nano/ but I don't think the code for > > that > > has been written into the program. > > As you say, anything in /usr/share/ is under the control of the > packaging system and in, this case, "my default.nanorc" is not the > user's default.nanorc but the system's. It can do what it wants with > it. There is no bug here. > > > > There was no warning that it was going to do so. Worse there are > > > NO *.nanorc.dpkg-old files to replace the new color schemes with > > > my old ones. > > > > I think that facility only takes place for conffiles, and those > > files > > aren't conffiles. If they were, they would have to reside under > > /etc. > > Correct. Why should there be any warning when the packaging system > is only doing what it is designed to do? A user would alter nano's > behaviour in $HOME.
For the OP who probably isn't reading the list... The man pages for nano (command "man nano") says at end "See Also nanorc", and "man nanorc" says: During startup, nano will first read the system-wide settings, from /etc/nanorc (the exact path might be different), and then the user- specific settings, from ~/.nanorc. So, the correct file to customise nano settings is either of those two files. -- Tixy