[ofa-general] RE: compat-dapl-1.2.10 install bogosity

[Davis, Arlin R]

>> However, even once you fix that, modifying user configuration files
>> without their consent as part of make install is just a 
>*BAD* idea.  The
>> only time you should ever do anything like this is when you just flat
>> don't care about things like rpm packaging (or apt 
>packaging) and having
>> the files on your system trackable, verifiable, erasable, 
>etc.  Install
>> methods that do this sort of thing are a good way to really alienate
>> people in a position like me ;-)
>
>Turns out the dapl-2 package was doing this to.  I've attached 
>the patch
>I used to solve the problem.  I still don't know if I'd go around
>editing user config files on install/uninstall though.
>

Thanks, I will get these changes in as soon as possible. These changes 
were driven by the fact that there are other DAPL provider vendors 
that share this same configuration file, all adding/removing entries for

their specific provider. What is the proper way to handle the case
where packages need to add/remove entries in a shared configuration 
file?

-arlin