FS#48297 - [radvd] Why is radvd.conf.example installed as radvd.conf?

Attached to Project: Arch Linux
Opened by Tinu Weber (ayekat) - Monday, 22 February 2016, 11:25 GMT
Last edited by Sébastien Luttringer (seblu) - Saturday, 12 March 2016, 18:08 GMT
Task Type General Gripe
Category Packages: Extra
Status Closed
Assigned To Sébastien Luttringer (seblu)
Architecture All
Severity Very Low
Priority Normal
Reported Version
Due in Version Undecided
Due Date Undecided
Percent Complete 100%
Votes 0
Private No

Details

Description:
The PKGBUILD for radvd installs `/etc/radvd.conf.example` as `/etc/radvd.conf`. As the content is going to be replaced anyway, most users will either rename the existing configuration, or simply delete/overwrite it, so I cannot fully grasp this deviation from upstream.

Additional info:
* package version: radvd-2.12-1
* config and/or log files: Start of `/etc/radvd.conf.example`:

#
# NOTE NOTE NOTE NOTE NOTE NOTE NOTE NOTE NOTE NOTE NOTE NOTE NOTE NOTE
# NOTE NOTE
# NOTE This is an EXAMPLE, which serves only to demonstrate the NOTE
# NOTE syntax of radvd.conf, and is not meant to be used for a NOTE
# NOTE real radvd configuration. NOTE
# NOTE NOTE
# NOTE NOTE NOTE NOTE NOTE NOTE NOTE NOTE NOTE NOTE NOTE NOTE NOTE NOTE
#

Steps to reproduce:
* install radvd-2.12-1
* open /etc/radvd.conf in a text editor
This task depends upon

Closed by  Sébastien Luttringer (seblu)
Saturday, 12 March 2016, 18:08 GMT
Reason for closing:  Not a bug
Comment by Sébastien Luttringer (seblu) - Tuesday, 23 February 2016, 00:44 GMT
This is a bug reporting system, not a place to ask questions.

What's is your problem?
Comment by Tinu Weber (ayekat) - Tuesday, 23 February 2016, 09:22 GMT
I'm sorry if this is misplaced, but I was referred here after asking the same question on the BBS [1].

It isn't a "problem" in a classical way - it's just something that strikes me as odd, and I'm wondering why we deviate from upstream in a way that makes the user change the file back to default (or delete it) anyway.

[1] https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=209220
Comment by Sébastien Luttringer (seblu) - Saturday, 12 March 2016, 18:07 GMT
There is 2 reasons.
1) It gives you a example of the content of this file.
2) It allows you to track update and easily merge update with your file.
If this file was not the default, you would copy it yourself with cp and then cooking it for your needs. Removing the header, uncommenting, etc. Whatever you want but the resulting file structure is close.
As this file is not updated frequently by upstream, using it as default file, allow you to see what they changed in their options when you run pacdiff.

Loading...