The debian-private mailing list leak, part 1. Volunteers have complained about Blackmail. Lynchings. Character assassination. Defamation. Cyberbullying. Volunteers who gave many years of their lives are picked out at random for cruel social experiments. The former DPL's girlfriend Molly de Blanc is given volunteers to experiment on for her crazy talks. These volunteers never consented to be used like lab rats. We don't either. debian-private can no longer be a safe space for the cabal. Let these monsters have nowhere to hide. Volunteers are not disposable. We stand with the victims.
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Bug#3486: forwarded message from Cron Daemon

[I'm doing this on debian-private because I don't think this needs
to be discussed in public. If you disagree, feel free to change
it...]

Ian Jackson wrote:
> 
> 
> Package: cern-httpd
> Version: 3.0-6
> 
> /etc/cron.weekly/cern-httpd sent me the message below.
> 
> This is probably because of the line:
>  /usr/sbin/cern-httpd -restart 2> /dev/null
> 
> My httpd is configured for one-shot operation out of inetd, so this
> probably won't work.  Of course sending the error message to /dev/null
> isn't helpful ...

To answer the last point first, the '2> /dev/null' was added because
otherwise you get a message everytime it successfully restarts.

Before I continue, I want to state this is *not* an attack on Ian,
it's just that his message inspired the following diatribe:

On the larger point, just how accomodating to are we supposed to
be? My intent is to deliver a working set of configuration files.
When a user starts changing them, my feeling is that it is then
the user's responsibility to make sure that *all* of the configuration
files affected by the change are appropriately changed.

There is no way I can test all the possible configurations of
something like cern-httpd. (I enough problems doing good tests of
the base configuration :-)).

I've seen several discussions/arguments over the past year when a
user didn't like the way a package was configured, and wanted the
distributed version changed to suit them. There was the recent
battle over where "web trees" belonged. I watched it for a while,
decided that no consensus was likely to arise, and then ignored
it.

If you don't like the way a package is configured, change it.
That's why they're called "configuration files", and that's why
dpkg has an elaborate mechanism to avoid writing over configuration
files that have been modified.

That said, I probably will modify the cern-httpd scripts to deal
with running it from inetd, because that *is* a common variation.
But I think the goal is to deliver a working, reliable package,
not to accomodate every possible use.

Steve Greenland

-- 
The Mole - I think, therefore I scream 

			"Justice, like lightning, should ever appear
			 To some people, hope, and to other ones, fear."
[A slightly changed version of Tony Isabella's opening lines to BLACK
 LIGHTNING]