Subject: Re: netatalk and pkg/9948
To: Johnny C. Lam <email@example.com>
From: Bill Studenmund <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 07/12/2000 18:44:38
On Wed, 12 Jul 2000, Johnny C. Lam wrote:
> Bill Studenmund <email@example.com> writes:
> Well, nothing becomes "live" unless you actually fire up atalkd. The
> actual example config files are mostly empty save for comments. This
> is just like what happens when samba, ssh, and cups are installed.
> The pkg admin is also told when pkg_deleting netatalk to optionally
> delete /etc/netatalk if it's no longer necessary.
Yes, but if you fire up atalkd, the standard rc.atalk will fire up the
daemons which use these files too. :-) Also, while they are mostly empty,
they are not 100% empty. AppleVolumes.default turns on "~" export support
You're comparing everything to how other packages work. Having this
package work as they do is fine. I'm saying compare the result of these
changes to how netatalk used to work too.
> Well, that's why the admin is asked to _merge_ the old config files
> into the ones at the new locations. I think this is better than
> blindly copying them, in case someone does decide to upgrade to a new
> netatalk from an incompatible version sometime down the road.
While I agree with your sentiment here, we aren't talking about upgrading
across incompatible versions right now. :-) We're talking about upgrading
across a change in how this package has behaved since its inception, a
time over which the file format hasn't changed.
I think it's perfectly fine to leave comments (perhaps very large) in the
script saying that this behavior may need to change in the future. But for
now, please just copy the files over.
> I'm thinking that this is an acceptable solution to the problem -- no
> config files are ever overwritten. I'll commit it soonish unless
> there are other objections.
Why is it so important to install examples when we find there are existing
files, given that at the moment we aren't changing the file format? Why
make life harder on an admin?