On Sun, 01 May 2011, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
On Sat, 30 Apr 2011, Russ Allbery wrote:
Steve Langasek vor...@debian.org writes:
I don't think that /etc/shadow qualifies as a configuration file,
either; I would call it variable state information (→ /var/lib), but
it lives in
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh h...@debian.org writes:
That said, relocating it to outside of /etc is a Major Bad Idea, and I
very strongly recommend against it. Local configuration to move it
somewhere else is already provided, but you just have extreme amount of
application documentation and
On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 05:15:09PM +0200, Holger Levsen wrote:
On Freitag, 29. April 2011, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
Regardless, policy states the following in section 6.8:
5. The conffiles and any backup files (~-files, #*# files, %-files,
.dpkg-{old,new,tmp}, etc.) are removed.
Hi Steve,
On Samstag, 30. April 2011, Steve Langasek wrote:
10.7.3: If the existence of a [configuration] file is required for the
package to be sensibly configured it is the responsibility of the package
maintainer to provide maintainer scripts which correctly create, update and
maintain the
On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 12:02:46PM +0200, Holger Levsen wrote:
On Samstag, 30. April 2011, Steve Langasek wrote:
10.7.3: If the existence of a [configuration] file is required for the
package to be sensibly configured it is the responsibility of the package
maintainer to provide maintainer
Steve Langasek vor...@debian.org writes:
(If one wishes to argue that /etc/sasldb2 is not a configuration file,
then it's also a policy violation for it to be under /etc.)
It's basically similar to /etc/shadow.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/
On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 03:49:26PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
Steve Langasek vor...@debian.org writes:
(If one wishes to argue that /etc/sasldb2 is not a configuration file,
then it's also a policy violation for it to be under /etc.)
It's basically similar to /etc/shadow.
I don't think
7 matches
Mail list logo
