Welcome to Soft32 Linux Forums!
FAQFAQ    SearchSearch      ProfileProfile    Private MessagesPrivate Messages   Log inLog in

RFC: Proposal to improve package configuration upgrades

  
   Soft32 Home -> Linux -> Development RSS
Next:  Accepted weechat 0.3.0-1 (source all amd64)  
Author Message
Dominique Dumont

External


Since: Feb 01, 2007
Posts: 15



(Msg. 1) Posted: Thu Sep 17, 2009 9:20 am
Post subject: RFC: Proposal to improve package configuration upgrades
Archived from groups: linux>debian>devel, others (more info?)
Hello

The other day, I was upgrading cups and dpkg did ask me the usual way
if I wanted to keep my cups config file or take the upstream version.

Like always, I asked for a diff and was quite puzzled because I did
not remember anything about editing this file. Then I remembered that
I did a modification through cups admin web interface.

Previous common story you might say. But for a casual user (like my
mother-in-law which now use Debian Lenny Wink ), this can be
frustrating:
- I did modify the config through a nice web interface
- during the upgrade, I either have to look at all the gory details of
cupsd config file or I have to loose my configuration.

I was thinking that this is a typical case where package upgrade
could be better handled with Config::Model help.

So, I've written a wiki page [1] that explains:
- how configuration upgrade are managed by Config::Model
- how to implement such upgrades with Approx example:
* create a configuration model for approx.conf
* the patch required for approx package scripts
- how to use a new dh_ tool that will simplify setup of configuration
upgrade for package based on debhelper (dh_config_model_upgrade). A
patch for openssh-server is provided.
- the bonus (config GUI)
- the current limitations (*)

To approx and openssh maintainers: Is there something missing that would
prevent you to use Config::Model for your package ?

Other package maintainers: what do you think ? Can this be applied to the
configuration of your packages ?

You can either reply to this mail or directly edit the wiki page [1].

All the best


[1] http://wiki.debian.org/PackageConfigUpgrade

(*) Manoj, I have not attempted a model for sendmail... Wink

--
Dominique Dumont
"Delivering successful solutions requires giving people what they
need, not what they want." Kurt Bittner

irc:
domidumont at irc.freenode.net
ddumont at irc.debian.org


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST.RemoveThis@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster.RemoveThis@lists.debian.org
Back to top
Login to vote
Guy Hulbert

External


Since: Jan 15, 2007
Posts: 6



(Msg. 2) Posted: Thu Sep 17, 2009 11:20 am
Post subject: Re: RFC: Proposal to improve package configuration upgrades [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
On Thu, 2009-17-09 at 14:11 +0200, Dominique Dumont wrote:
> The other day, I was upgrading cups and dpkg did ask me the usual way
> if I wanted to keep my cups config file or take the upstream version.

This email looks very familiar. Did you send something quite similar a
few months ago?

I see the wiki page started on: 2009-03-23

but there is no discussion page yet ... perhaps we should use it ?

--
--gh



--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST.RemoveThis@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster.RemoveThis@lists.debian.org
Back to top
Login to vote
Dominique Dumont

External


Since: Feb 01, 2007
Posts: 15



(Msg. 3) Posted: Thu Sep 17, 2009 11:20 am
Post subject: Re: RFC: Proposal to improve package configuration upgrades [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
Guy Hulbert <gwhulbert.RemoveThis@eol.ca> writes:

> On Thu, 2009-17-09 at 14:11 +0200, Dominique Dumont wrote:
>> The other day, I was upgrading cups and dpkg did ask me the usual way
>> if I wanted to keep my cups config file or take the upstream version.
>
> This email looks very familiar. Did you send something quite similar a
> few months ago?

Yes, one very first stab in debian-devel aroundin February . I was
encouraged by Zach to write some code. I felt that the code alone would
not be enough so I created the wiki page.

I sent a first request for comment of the first draft of the wiki page
in April to debian-perl. Thanks to the comment from Jonas Smedegaard,
this led to some clarification of the specification of a configuration
model and the creation of dh_config_model_upgrade.

Then GSoC happened. Being GSoC mentor did slow down work on
Config::Model and package config upgrade. Wink

> I see the wiki page started on: 2009-03-23
>
> but there is no discussion page yet ... perhaps we should use it ?

That's a good idea !

All the best

--
Dominique Dumont
"Delivering successful solutions requires giving people what they
need, not what they want." Kurt Bittner

irc:
domidumont at irc.freenode.net
ddumont at irc.debian.org


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST.RemoveThis@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster.RemoveThis@lists.debian.org
Back to top
Login to vote
Dominique Dumont

External


Since: Mar 13, 2007
Posts: 30



(Msg. 4) Posted: Tue Oct 06, 2009 11:20 am
Post subject: Proposal to improve approx configuration upgrades [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
Hello

Le jeudi 17 septembre 2009 14:11:01, Dominique Dumont a écrit :
> So, I've written a wiki page [1] that explains:
> - how configuration upgrade are managed by Config::Model
> - how to implement such upgrades with Approx example:
> * create a configuration model for approx.conf
> * the patch required for approx package scripts

In order to minimize the modifications to apply to approx package, I've
created the libconfig-model-approx package, so now there's no need to ship
approx.conf configuration model in approx package.

The patch for approx is much simpler (See attachment):
* a call to config-edit in postinst script
* a new dependency on libconfig-model-approx-perl

Now what's next?

Can I submit a bug to approx package to push this idea further?

Eric, what do you think ?

All the best

[1] http://wiki.debian.org/PackageConfigUpgrade


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST.RemoveThis@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster.RemoveThis@lists.debian.org
Back to top
Login to vote
Dominique Dumont

External


Since: Mar 13, 2007
Posts: 30



(Msg. 5) Posted: Wed Oct 07, 2009 11:20 am
Post subject: Re: Proposal to improve approx configuration upgrades [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: linux>debian>maint>perl, others (more info?)
Hello Eric

Le mercredi 7 octobre 2009 13:09:06, vous avez écrit :
> I don't really want to add a dependency on another package for such a
> simple task.

Simple, but it may be repetitive. Here a real life comment made by one of your
users on #debian-perl:

<quote>
(03:02:23 PM) dusty: ddumont1: thanks for writing that doc. I didn't even
know that existed. I may see about using it in my own packages. Your approx
example really hits me because we use approx all over the place and have been
hit with the recent (in the etch to lenny transition) changes to the config
format of that file. It was always great fun to update our approx settings...
whee.
</quote>

This kind of migration could be handled by config::model: the old syntax would
be replaced by the new one. My patch would ensure that this upgrade is done at
package upgrade time (although I arrived too late for Etch to Lenny migration
:-p )

> Anyone deploying a caching proxy server should be able
> to read a man page and edit a config file.

That's a fair point. Approx users are not average users.

> In general, if you want your approach to be adopted, I suggest making
> it more separate from the packages themselves and more incremental.

Yes, but the idea is to handle config upgrade during package upgrade. I do not
know how this can be done outside of the upgraded package.

> Perhaps you could follow the model of logcheck, or ifupdown --
> standardize on a directory that each package can put their scripts in,
> so it works if your config tool is installed, but has no effect
> otherwise.

I'll have to think about it. I do not know how to trigger the execution of
'config-edit' this way.

> Also, I haven't looked into either one in enough detail, but how does
> your approach differ from ucf?

ucf has a rather crude upgrade strategy: either accept upstream or keep your
file or use your favorite editor. That's not very cool for average users.

config-model is more subtle: upstream/packager data are merged with user data
without user interaction. As a bonus, the user will get a GUI with integrated
help to edit the configuration (I acknowledge that this may not be seen as a
bonus for hardboiled sys admins Wink )

All the best


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-perl-REQUEST RemoveThis @lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster RemoveThis @lists.debian.org
Back to top
Login to vote
Dominique Dumont

External


Since: Mar 13, 2007
Posts: 30



(Msg. 6) Posted: Thu Oct 08, 2009 7:20 am
Post subject: Re: Proposal to improve approx configuration upgrades [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
Le mercredi 7 octobre 2009 21:13:45, Steve Langasek a écrit :
> > ucf has a rather crude upgrade strategy: either accept upstream or keep
> > your file or use your favorite editor.
>
> That's not true. ucf supports three-way merges.

You're right.

But three-way merge still requires the end-user to validate the merge. (Or to
resolve conflicts).

Config::Model can perform a similar task without user input.

All the best


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-perl-REQUEST DeleteThis @lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster DeleteThis @lists.debian.org
Back to top
Login to vote
Dominique Dumont

External


Since: Mar 13, 2007
Posts: 30



(Msg. 7) Posted: Fri Oct 09, 2009 11:20 am
Post subject: Re: Proposal to improve approx configuration upgrades [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: linux>debian>devel, others (more info?)
Le mercredi 7 octobre 2009 13:09:06, vous avez écrit :
> I don't really want to add a dependency on another package for such a
> simple task. Anyone deploying a caching proxy server should be able
> to read a man page and edit a config file.

Ok. Looks like you're not convinced...

Could you at least:
- add libconfig-model-approx-perl in Suggest:
- mention in the doc that configuration and upgrade can be done with config-
edit-approx provided by libconfig-model-approx-perl.

On my side, I will enhance Approx parser to ensure that old approx conf files
(etch) can be upgraded to new approx file format (addition of '$' prefix where
needed).

Is there any other old approx upgrade issue to take care of ?

All the best


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST.TakeThisOut@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster.TakeThisOut@lists.debian.org
Back to top
Login to vote
Display posts from previous:   
Related Topics:
Resolved bugs keeping packages out of testing? - Hi, I have several "excuses" pages that resemble this one: http://qa.debian.org/excuses.php?package=darcs-b...

[Task #159] Improve hurd/gnumach/mig package descriptions - Task #159 has been updated. Project: Debian GNU/Hurd port Subproject: general Summary: Improve hurd/gnumach/mig..

Proposal - obvious wording bugfix amendment to Debian Main.. - -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 I propose the wording changes in the diff below and request seconds. I....

Hardware upgrades for the Indy? - Greetings! What are the best upgrades for these machines? Where can one get 50pin SCSI2 disks anymore? Take care, -...

Newbie to RPM: Help with upgrades - Could somebody please help. I am currently running redhat 9 and i would like to upgrade certain programs to the levels....

yum and kernel upgrades - How do I prevent yum from upgrading my kernel?
       Soft32 Home -> Linux -> Development All times are: Pacific Time (US & Canada) (change)
Page 1 of 1

 
 You can post new topics in this forum
You can reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Categories:
 Windows
  Linux
 Mac
 PDA

[ Contact us | Terms of Service/Privacy Policy ]