On Sunday 22 June 2008 19:41:33 Jan de Groot wrote:
Bad system design is something else than leaving people on their own to secure things.
Depends on your opinion,...
These user accounts own files.
So you're trying to fix a problem that wouldnt be there if arch would use the default upstream package, which doesnt contain user owned files. See why i think the debian way is bad? They're stacking problems since ages, which results in scripts fixing the results of other scripts.
Do you think it's sane to tell users to chown the files back to the user they assigned to it on every package upgrade?
Yes. If the users decide to use software in a way not supported by the upstream (there are no user owned files in the default packages...) then they have to handle the results on their own (PKGBUILD is so easy...) I'm doing this with exim for ages now to add ssl and i feel it is a lot less painfull then what has been done with qt,linux,apache,etc where i have to make my own pkgbuild to get rid of unverified patches, automatic installer scripts, fucked up default configs (arch apache config - a debian rip of- STILL uses AddType, after it has been deprecated for like 10 years), and whatever things people add when they have too much time. Every new script you add makes the mess worse. Just look at debian. If you like the way debian "works", go on. I don't.
Pacman takes backups of configuration files, but doesn't preserve ownership on a package upgrade.
Can't find any server software on my machines that has user owned config files. -- best regards/Mit freundlichen Grüßen Arvid Ephraim Picciani