Cherokee Web Server

Alvaro Lopez Ortega | 1 Dec 2009 13:02

Re: Upgrade debian/ubuntu packages messed up my configuration

On 01/12/2009, at 12:48, Pablo Hernan Saro wrote:

> So, did the upgrade process messed up your configuration or it was
> because you provided the wrong answer?

No, it's a permissions issue, actually. The configuration file format has not changed.

> Because this is the way package managers deal with configuration
> files. So easy, just answer "keep my configuration file" and you're
> done. BTW, a good practice is to backup config files and other stuff
> before performing software upgrades.

Indeed!

--
Octality
http://www.octality.com/

headers

Site Mail | 1 Dec 2009 13:40

Re: Upgrade debian/ubuntu packages messed up my configuration

This time I kept my old config, but in some other upgrade it happened I pressed the wrong key and erased all the settings.

My point is that if you see an upgrade of configuration files and see the maintainer has changed some stuff one could think "hey, new stuff added to default configuration, should be better than the one I have".

So in order to have those changes one have to inspect the files and do the diff and then tweak manually the file. I do not think this should be done like this (as the config file says, the file should only be modified via the admin interface).

An easier approach would be to keep the user config separated from the default config, or even each vhost in its own file?

Lucky me I had copies of my /etc files, so it was not big problem, etckeeper saved my life!

Thanks for your answers!

On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 1:02 PM, Alvaro Lopez Ortega <alvaro <at> octality.com> wrote:

On 01/12/2009, at 12:48, Pablo Hernan Saro wrote:

> So, did the upgrade process messed up your configuration or it was
> because you provided the wrong answer?

No, it's a permissions issue, actually. The configuration file format has not changed.

> Because this is the way package managers deal with configuration
> files. So easy, just answer "keep my configuration file" and you're
> done. BTW, a good practice is to backup config files and other stuff
> before performing software upgrades.

Indeed!

--
Octality
http://www.octality.com/

_______________________________________________
Cherokee mailing list
Cherokee <at> lists.octality.com
http://lists.octality.com/listinfo/cherokee

headers

Gunnar Wolf | 3 Dec 2009 19:24

Re: Upgrade debian/ubuntu packages messed up my configuration

Site Mail dijo [Tue, Dec 01, 2009 at 01:40:25PM +0100]:
> This time I kept my old config, but in some other upgrade it happened I
> pressed the wrong key and erased all the settings.
> My point is that if you see an upgrade of configuration files and see the
> maintainer has changed some stuff one could think "hey, new stuff added to
> default configuration, should be better than the one I have".
> 
> So in order to have those changes one have to inspect the files and do the
> diff and then tweak manually the file. I do not think this should be done
> like this (as the config file says, the file should only be modified via the
> admin interface).
> An easier approach would be to keep the user config separated from the
> default config, or even each vhost in its own file?
> 
> Lucky me I had copies of my /etc files, so it was not big problem,
>  etckeeper saved my life!

Umm... I'd like to tell you I have a plan to fix this, but I don't - I
only have the need to do it 

Thing is, yes, /etc/cherokee/cherokee.conf _is_ a configuration
file. As new features are added into Cherokee, new options appear in
the config file. But the average Cherokee user will be at most vaguely
familiar with the configuration format, as it is meant to be handled
by the great cherokee-admin tool.

I have to check a bit into Debian's UCF, which is meant to handle this
kind of situations (and have not found time to do this). Still, the
problem will continue popping up - as there is no automatic way (for
me as the Debian packager) to merge new features into an existing
configuration while preserving your changes. Of course, it would be
even worse just to discard your changes!

In its early versions, Cherokee supported multiple files, but since
cherokee-admin appeared (0.6? 0.7?) it is no longer the case (IIRC
they are supported but deprecated and not encouraged - support might
have even completely dropped since). 

I once mentioned the configuration should no longer be viewed as our
standard, Unixy, hand-editable-by-anybody configfile... And the more I
think about it, the more it convinces me. People, excuse me if I am
rehashing something that has already been debated, but... How does
moving the configuration to /var/lib/cherokee sound to you? 

Being in /var/lib/cherokee makes it clear it is not a file meant to be
edited by just anybody. And it makes it easier (and policy-wise,
feasible) to modify it programatically, either via cherokee-admin or
via migrator scripts. Besides, the configuration format has stabilized
(I hope we will never see another 05_to_06.py again!), and I guess
future changes could even be incorporated into cherokee-admin's
startup routines.

Please comment.

Greetings,

--

-- 
Gunnar Wolf • gwolf <at> gwolf.org • (+52-55)5623-0154 / 1451-2244
_______________________________________________
Cherokee mailing list
Cherokee <at> lists.octality.com
http://lists.octality.com/listinfo/cherokee

headers

Sandino Araico Sánchez | 4 Dec 2009 05:55

Re: Upgrade debian/ubuntu packages messed up my configuration

I still can't find any difference between 0.5 and >=0.6 format other 
than readability. The nested structure remains much the same but <=0.5 
was easier to read and easier to edit by hand.

The cumbersomeness  to edit the /etc/cherokee/cherokee.conf by hand does 
not mean It can't be edited by hand.

Tne cherokee admin tool is optional. I could some day prefer to just 
copy the /etc/cherokee/cherokee.conf from one server to another and do 
minor edits by hand.

Something I wish Cherokee had is a directory named /etc/cherokee/conf.d 
and put small config files in it but in the meantime I can survive 
without includes.

My point is: The /etc/cherokee/cherokee.conf is a configuration file and 
should live in the same place than the rest of the configuration files. 
I see no reason for moving it to /var/lib .

Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> I once mentioned the configuration should no longer be viewed as our
> standard, Unixy, hand-editable-by-anybody configfile... And the more I
> think about it, the more it convinces me. People, excuse me if I am
> rehashing something that has already been debated, but... How does
> moving the configuration to /var/lib/cherokee sound to you? 
>
> Being in /var/lib/cherokee makes it clear it is not a file meant to be
> edited by just anybody. And it makes it easier (and policy-wise,
> feasible) to modify it programatically, either via cherokee-admin or
> via migrator scripts. Besides, the configuration format has stabilized
> (I hope we will never see another 05_to_06.py again!), and I guess
> future changes could even be incorporated into cherokee-admin's
> startup routines.
>
> Please comment.
>
> Greetings,
>
>   

--

-- 
Sandino Araico Sánchez 
http://sandino.net

_______________________________________________
Cherokee mailing list
Cherokee <at> lists.octality.com
http://lists.octality.com/listinfo/cherokee

headers

Alvaro Lopez Ortega | 4 Dec 2009 07:36

Re: Upgrade debian/ubuntu packages messed up my configuration

On 04/12/2009, at 05:55, Sandino Araico Sánchez wrote:

> Something I wish Cherokee had is a directory named /etc/cherokee/conf.d 
> and put small config files in it but in the meantime I can survive 
> without includes.

For what is worth, Cherokee does support includes by using the "include" and "try_include" tags. They can
include files and directories independently.

Their use is discouraged though.

--
Octality
http://www.octality.com/