[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Strange behaviour of dpkg



Hi,

  I'm encountering a problem when upgrading my giram-* packages. 
  Currently, giram-* 0.1.9 packages are in unstable and I prepared
  a 0.1.10 aiming at replacing them all.

  I'll give an example of the problem with giram-mesa.

  Conffiles appear twice in giram-mesa because I did not notice at first
  glance that debhelper v3 automatically adds all /etc files to the conffiles.

  Once installed, giram-mesa gives:

amboise:~$ dpkg -s giram-mesa
Package: giram-mesa
Status: install ok installed
Priority: optional
Section: graphics
Installed-Size: 2156
Maintainer: Jerome Marant <jerome@debian.org>
Source: giram
Version: 0.1.9-2
Replaces: giram, giram-gnome, giram-gnome-mesa
Provides: giram
Depends: lib3ds-1.0-0, libc6 (>= 2.2.3-1), libgl1, libglib1.2 (>= 1.2.0), libgtk1.2 (>= 1.2.10-1), xlibs (>> 4.0.3)
Suggests: povray
Conflicts: giram, giram-gnome, giram-gnome-mesa
Conffiles:
 /etc/giram/0.1/giramrc 5000e5edd0db24a5b729d659d5bb0ba1
 /etc/giram/0.1/giramrc_user f5767de5d4cbf674bd28da48dcf9bdd2
 /etc/giram/0.1/gtkrc eaca718263de3bd6d0f28de79aba9295
 /etc/giram/0.1/gtkrc_user 45e7ea822c126fa29e163295f7239e17
 /etc/giram/0.1/ps-menurc 0cc742b7941bc398f41de07af0d2095d
 /etc/giram/0.1/giramrc newconffile
 /etc/giram/0.1/giramrc_user newconffile
 /etc/giram/0.1/gtkrc newconffile
 /etc/giram/0.1/gtkrc_user newconffile
 /etc/giram/0.1/ps-menurc newconffile
Description: 3D modeller for POV-Ray
....

  And here is the conffile list:

amboise:~$ cat /var/lib/dpkg/info/giram-mesa.conffiles
/etc/giram/0.1/giramrc
/etc/giram/0.1/giramrc_user
/etc/giram/0.1/gtkrc
/etc/giram/0.1/gtkrc_user
/etc/giram/0.1/ps-menurc
/etc/giram/0.1/giramrc
/etc/giram/0.1/giramrc_user
/etc/giram/0.1/gtkrc
/etc/giram/0.1/gtkrc_user
/etc/giram/0.1/ps-menurc


  Then, I installed giram 0.1.10 which replaced giram-mesa as
  expected:


amboise:~$ sudo dpkg -i giram_0.1.10-1_i386.deb
Selecting previously deselected package giram.
dpkg: considering removing giram-mesa in favour of giram ...
dpkg: yes, will remove giram-mesa in favour of giram.
(Reading database ... 98669 files and directories currently installed.)
Unpacking giram (from giram_0.1.10-1_i386.deb) ...
Setting up giram (0.1.10-1) ...


  Conffiles look good and have been installed where I expected
  the to.


amboise:~$ cat /var/lib/dpkg/info/giram.conffiles 
/etc/giram/0.1/giramrc
/etc/giram/0.1/giramrc_user
/etc/giram/0.1/gtkrc
/etc/giram/0.1/gtkrc_user
/etc/giram/0.1/ps-menurc

amboise:~$ ls -al /etc/giram/0.1/
total 10
drwxr-xr-x    2 root     root         1024 Aug 23 15:22 .
drwxr-xr-x    3 root     root         1024 Aug 23 15:21 ..
-rw-r--r--    1 root     root         1667 Jun 28 14:42 giramrc
-rw-r--r--    1 root     root          633 Jun 28 14:42 giramrc_user
-rw-r--r--    1 root     root          397 Jun 28 14:42 gtkrc
-rw-r--r--    1 root     root          200 Jun 28 14:42 gtkrc_user
-rw-r--r--    1 root     root         2437 Jun 28 14:42 ps-menurc


  Then, I purged  giram-mesa:


amboise:~$ dpkg --purge giram-mesa
dpkg: requested operation requires superuser privilege
amboise:~/debian/packages/giram$ sudo dpkg --purge giram-mesa
(Reading database ... 98669 files and directories currently installed.)
Removing giram-mesa ...
Purging configuration files for giram-mesa ...


  This made strangely conffiles from giram disappear:


amboise:~$ ls /etc/giram/0.1/
amboise:~$


  Then, I decided to reinstall the new giram in order to recover
  my conffiles


amboise:~/debian/packages/giram$ sudo dpkg -i giram_0.1.10-1_i386.deb
(Reading database ... 98669 files and directories currently installed.)
Preparing to replace giram 0.1.10-1 (using giram_0.1.10-1_i386.deb) ...
Unpacking replacement giram ...
Setting up giram (0.1.10-1) ...

amboise:~$ ls -al /etc/giram/0.1/
amboise:~$ 


  But it strangely did not recover them.


  I really have no idea on what is happening.

  giram 0.1.10 is not yet in unstable. I put it at:
  http://jerome.marant.free.fr/debian/giram


Thanks in advance.

-- 
Jérôme Marant <jerome.marant@free.fr>



Reply to: