Re: Should ucf be of priority required?
On 2009-12-05 16:47 +0100, Patrick Schoenfeld wrote:
> when testing my packages with piuparts I noticed an inability of
> our package management. Dpkg does not have support for management
> of dynamically generated configuration files. Therefore some packages
> now use ucf.
> The basic usage is somewhat like
> - Registering config files to ucf on installation
> - Using it when configuring the package to merge configuration updates
> and local changes
> - Unregistering config files to ucf on purge
- Removing config files on purge
> The crux is the last point. For a good reason postrm must not require
> tools it depends on to be around when removing the package itself.
> So the call of ucf looks something like that:
> if which ucf >/dev/null; then
> ucf --purge /etc/foo.conf
> That is okay, as long as ucf is around. But as soon as it isn't
> the purge of a package is succesful while leaving modified files around.
It is the package's responsibility to remove those files, "ucf --purge"
does not do that, see ucf(1).
> So the effect is that a purge does not "remove everything".
> Do we really want that? Should ucf be 'required' to avoid that?
That would be no good.