Marc Haber wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Feb 2023 11:23:55 -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> >I think the right answer (which as is often the case involves a lot more
> >work) is to break the configuration file into separate parts, one of which
> >is a true configuration file in the Policy definition and the
Marc Haber wrote...
> The "split it" approach is something that comes naturally to someone
> who has been heavily socialized in the Debian Universe because we
> handle conffiles on a file level. It feels unnatural and clumsy for
> someone who is not familiar with the deep historic reasons for us
On Wed, Feb 15, 2023 at 07:50:10AM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Well, I adore this way of configuring things and think it's way better
> than how Debian has been doing it and I haven't used Red Hat since the
> late 1990s, so *shrug*. :)
>
> But the point wasn't to advocate for that approach
Marc Haber writes:
> The issue is, however, a lot more complicated than one would might
> think, imagine a structured configuration file like a systemd unit or an
> icinga or bind or ISC DHCP config file which would need multiple
> "managed sections", and the special case of a setting moving
On Tue, 14 Feb 2023 at 19:24, Russ Allbery wrote:
>
> Christoph Biedl writes:
>
> > these days, I found a package in Debian (four-digit popcon count) that
> > in an upgrade happily removed some some changes I had made to a
> > configuration file of that package, in /etc/.
>
> > My immediate
On Tue, 14 Feb 2023 11:23:55 -0800, Russ Allbery
wrote:
>I think the right answer (which as is often the case involves a lot more
>work) is to break the configuration file into separate parts, one of which
>is a true configuration file in the Policy definition and the other of
>which is the
Christoph Biedl writes:
> these days, I found a package in Debian (four-digit popcon count) that
> in an upgrade happily removed some some changes I had made to a
> configuration file of that package, in /etc/.
> My immediate reaction was to consider this a gross violation of the
> Debian
Hello,
these days, I found a package in Debian (four-digit popcon count) that
in an upgrade happily removed some some changes I had made to a
configuration file of that package, in /etc/.
My immediate reaction was to consider this a gross violation of the
Debian Policy (10.7.3 "Behaviour"). Upon
8 matches
Mail list logo
