Hi! We will soon start upgrading our Ubuntu mail server (running 2.0.19) from 12.04.1 LTSto 14.04 LTS. The dovecot config is still pretty much in 1.x style; one flat file called dovecot.conf. I can easily switch to a dovecot.conf with the "!include" lines and rename my flat config file to local.conf. I've tested that and it works fine. I could also try to move all lines in local.conf to the different XX-.conf files in the conf.d subdir. What is wise and best practice? Should one edit the files in conf.d? Or will the files in conf.d be overwritten on an update of dovecot? Then I'll better stick to the way of working with the dovecot.conf with the !includes and local.conf and assume that all files in conf.d are default settings.
TNX for any advise! Egbert Jan, HCC!hobbynet, NL
Am 2014-06-18 22:25, schrieb Egbert:
Hi! We will soon start upgrading our Ubuntu mail server (running 2.0.19) from 12.04.1 LTSto 14.04 LTS. The dovecot config is still pretty much in 1.x style; one flat file called dovecot.conf. I can easily switch to a dovecot.conf with the "!include" lines and rename my flat config file to local.conf. I've tested that and it works fine. I could also try to move all lines in local.conf to the different XX-.conf files in the conf.d subdir. What is wise and best practice? Should one edit the files in conf.d? Or will the files in conf.d be overwritten on an update of dovecot? Then I'll better stick to the way of working with the dovecot.conf with the !includes and local.conf and assume that all files in conf.d are default settings.
Another Ubuntu 12.04 admin here, having almost all local configuration in local.conf ;) and happy about a single and quite short file to maintain.
That lets me ADD, but not subtract stuff from conf.d/* (I had to comment a line that pulls in pam system users authentication because that would cause a timeout with virtual users on every login…)
PS: /etc is under revision control so I still get to see changes in conf.d/* when upgrading the package, in case I want to know.
-- peter
On 18.6.2014 22:25, Egbert wrote:
Hi! We will soon start upgrading our Ubuntu mail server (running 2.0.19) from 12.04.1 LTSto 14.04 LTS. The dovecot config is still pretty much in 1.x style; one flat file called dovecot.conf. I can easily switch to a dovecot.conf with the "!include" lines and rename my flat config file to local.conf. I've tested that and it works fine. I could also try to move all lines in local.conf to the different XX-.conf files in the conf.d subdir. What is wise and best practice? Should one edit the files in conf.d? Or will the files in conf.d be overwritten on an update of dovecot? Then I'll better stick to the way of working with the dovecot.conf with the !includes and local.conf and assume that all files in conf.d are default settings.
TNX for any advise! Egbert Jan, HCC!hobbynet, NL
The split configuration is useful for automated updates/upgrades. The packaging system knows if particular config file was changed and if it wasn't, it's replaced by a new version without bothering you.
For example, let's say you have single config file and only single line differs from default configuration - say "auth_verbose". When you upgrade, the packaging system tells you "the configuration was changed" and you need to either manually figure out all changes and apply them to your configuration or lose your own configuration changes (or attempt a 3-way merge)
With split configuration files the packaging system silently replaces all configuration with new defaults except 10-loging.conf and you only need to worry about that file.
Plus, on Ubuntu you have different Dovecot components (core, imapd, pop3d, mysql) split into different packages and these packages have separate config files as well.
So I'd recommend splitting the configuration. IMO it's easy way to keep it up-to-date with upstream changes without too much trouble (package maintainer does the work for you)
I ofc agree with previous post - use whatever works best for you.
On 6/19/2014 4:54 AM, Jiri Bourek bourek@thinline.cz wrote:
For example, let's say you have single config file and only single line differs from default configuration - say "auth_verbose". When you upgrade, the packaging system tells you "the configuration was changed" and you need to either manually figure out all changes and apply them to your configuration or lose your own configuration changes (or attempt a 3-way merge)
I prefer putting all of mine in one file in conf.d named 99-myconfig.conf.
This causes this file to be loaded last, so it overwrites any settings defined in the other config files.
Charles
Thanks all who replied with good advice. I think I'll go for the (short) local.conf solution. I don't like messing around with all separate files in conf.d. As long as they don't conflict with my settings, it will be OK.
Egbert Jan
Charles Marcus schreef op 19-6-2014 15:55:
On 6/19/2014 4:54 AM, Jiri Bourek bourek@thinline.cz wrote:
For example, let's say you have single config file and only single line differs from default configuration - say "auth_verbose". When you upgrade, the packaging system tells you "the configuration was changed" and you need to either manually figure out all changes and apply them to your configuration or lose your own configuration changes (or attempt a 3-way merge)
I prefer putting all of mine in one file in conf.d named 99-myconfig.conf.
This causes this file to be loaded last, so it overwrites any settings defined in the other config files.
Charles
participants (4)
-
Charles Marcus
-
Egbert
-
Jiri Bourek
-
Peter Chiochetti