TurnKey Linux's take on Ubuntu appliance development: KISS

[Steve Langasek]

On Thu, Jan 07, 2010 at 01:00:08PM +0100, Pau Garcia i Quiles wrote:
> > The difference is that, per policy, there should be no such
> > "postfix-appliance-config" package in Ubuntu that's modifying
> > dpkg-registered conffiles.  Any configuration files that need to be
> > programmatically altered by packages must first be unregistered from being
> > conffiles.

> What the Debian Policy probably aimed (and this is just my conjecture)
> is at avoiding unexpected changes to conffiles. I. e. your package
> should never touch my conffiles without warning me *beforehand* and
> *very clearly*.

> I'd say the Debian Policy was never meant for the "building a turn-key
> appliance"-case. Maybe an amendment is needed:
> "no package should modify conffiles installed by other packages" ->
> "no package should modify conffiles installed by other packages,
> except in the case the package which modifies other packages conffiles
> states clearly it will do that in its description"

Absolutely not.  If you *ever* have to touch a config file from a package,
be it the same package or another package, *conffiles are the wrong
mechanism to use*.  Policy should make no such exception.

-- 
Steve Langasek                   Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer                   to set it on, and I can move the world.
Ubuntu Developer                                    http://www.debian.org/
slangasek at ubuntu.com                                     vorlon at debian.org
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 828 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel/attachments/20100107/221a4261/attachment.pgp