Core packages are using %config for files being installed under /usr

[Axel Thimm]

On Fri, Mar 02, 2007 at 01:19:01PM +0100, Laurent Rineau wrote:
> On Friday 02 March 2007 13:00:14 Axel Thimm wrote:
> > OK, let's quote the FHS again which repeadedly lays great emphasis on
> > keeping /usr read-only (or possible to mount read-only if you prefer),
> > and not only from configuration files.
> 
> Let stop that useless flame.

Where is the flame in the above? And where is the stopping? ;)

> I *agree* that FSH target, about /usr, is to allow /usr to be mounted 
> read-only.
> 
> But "read-only" and "configuration files" are not correlated at all. When the 
> administrator modifies a config files (I mean with an editor), it is 
> an "admin operation", like an upgrade. I repeat: I have known some machines 
> with /etc/ mounted read-only!

So? Every other embedded device has /etc read-only. What do we really
learn from that?

> Every admin-operation on a partition can require remounting it
> read-write. It includes upgrades, but also modification of config
> files.
> 
> However, I agree that every config file of the system should have an instance 
> in /etc, so that host-specific stuff can be used in that config file. I am 
> not arguing on that point. I just wanted to spot out that your reading of the 
> FSH is not correct.

Well, you objected on me saying

On Thursday 01 March 2007 14:30:57 Axel Thimm wrote:
> Anyway personally I only care about removing %config from /usr, any
> solution will do.

So, are you back with me, now?

And my reading of the FHS is fine, but if we're agreeing on banning
%config from /usr we can close this, I can live with your opinion on
my reading skills. ;)
-- 
Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-maintainers/attachments/20070302/441ee248/attachment.sig>