[ENBD] Bring enbd back in Debian?

[Bas van Schaik]

Hi,

>"Also sprach Bas van Schaik:"
>  
>
>>> Currently, I'm having problems with the configfile /etc/enbd.conf and
>>> it's manpage. Both packages are related to this configfile and the
>>> manpage, but the files can't be in two packages at the same time. The
>>> most ideal solution would be two different configfiles:
>>> /etc/enbd/clients.conf and
>>> /etc/enbd/servers.conf
>>> 
>>> or
>>> 
>>> /etc/enbd-clients.conf and
>>> /etc/enbd-servers.conf
>>> 
>>> with two different manpages. I think this is a rather good idea, since
>>> the syntax for client and server directives differs on many points.
>>    
>>
>
>I have no problem with that, but the file is referenced by both
>enbd-cstatd and enbd-sstatd, the helper daemons. They might not like
>it  :-) .
>  
>
Hmmm... Splitting the configfiles is still the best solution, I think.
However, there is one other option:
enbd-cstatd will be in the enbd-client package, enbd-sstatd will be in
the enbd-server package. It's possible to create a seperate enbd-common
package with the one configfile in it. Both client and server packages
will depend on this common package.

I've heard some opinions on this solution from two Debian developers...
They told me it's probably just a lot of overhead to create a seperate
package for just one configuration file. On the other hand, it will
spare you a lot of time (I think), since both source and manpages should
be rewritten to fit in two packages.

If you do decide to split the configuration files, the following setup
(as you wrote) looks interesting:
/etc/enbd/client.conf (or enbd-client.conf) and
/etc/enbd/server.conf (or enbd-server.conf)

>>> Also the init.d script /etc/init.d/enbd can't be in two packages at the
>>> same time. To be honest, I don't think may people will run client &
>>> server on the same machine, because it doesn't make any sense to use a
>>> networked block device when you can easily use a local one. So two
>>> scripts /etc/init.d/enbd-clients and /etc/init.d/enbd-servers seems to
>>> be the best solution.
>>    
>>
>
>That can be done too.
>
>  
>
>>> Please let me hear your thoughts on this, because it affects not only
>>> the Debian-package, but also the source package.
>>    
>>
>
>Well, I have no real objections at all. Thank you for your efforts.
>  
>
Let me know what your opinion/decision is, after having considered all
of this.

--Bas