conffile changes in SRUs

[Philipp Kern]

Emmet,

am Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 09:51:27PM +0900 hast du folgendes geschrieben:
>     Depending on the nature of configuration parsing for the package
> concerned, it may be safer to modify the code to provide safe defaults
> for missing configuration entries.  If one updates a conffile, one is
> asking the user to manage merging any local configuration changes, and
> in the case of many of our conffiles, assuming that all supplementary
> included configuration is compatible with the change made.  If one
> instead modifies the configuration in a postinst, one may affect future
> upgrades, perhaps unfortunately in cases where the user has not made
> any local configuration changes.  If one imitates full configuration
> parsing in a postinst, with the intent of providing a safe configuration
> change, either with a new file or preserving user variations in a safe
> manner, one might be confident in the safety of the change, but this may
> require significant effort, and involve a higher degree of changes to
> the package as a whole than setting defaults in the code directly.

except that you are not allowed to touch a conffile from maintainer
scripts in any case (policy 10.7.3). Normal configuration files don't get
this guarantee, though.

Kind regards
Philipp Kern
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 490 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel/attachments/20130122/d6f7072e/attachment.pgp>