Re: /etc/adjtime, /etc/timezone, etc.
On 4 Sep 1998, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Santiago> But the reason policy says some files should not be
> Santiago> conffiles is the following: "Doing this will lead to dpkg
> Santiago> giving the user confusing and possibly dangerous options
> Santiago> for conffile update when the package is upgraded.", which
> Santiago> is completely false for conffiles that never change
>
> Well, I guess a rationale is that saying `never' anything is
> dangerous [...]
Yes, this could be some of the rationale I would like to see.
I hope not to be misunderstood. I *agree* with you that the postinst
solution is probably better, my only "complain" is that policy (currently)
does not give a rationale which is good enough for all cases yet.
--
"895004c4c3b4106584e9be1299f8183c" (a truly random sig)
Reply to: