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

Re: May packages rm -rf subdirectories of /etc/ ?

On 24 Jul 2003 09:46:24 +0200, Thomas Hood <jdthood@yahoo.co.uk> said: 

> On Thu, 2003-07-24 at 08:47, Andreas Metzler wrote:
>> It really sucks to handle this if you want/need to get rid of it
>> (if it is unmodified) not only on purge but on upgrades. - You'll
>> need
>> if [ "$1" = "configure" ] && \ dpkg --compare-versions "$2" le-nl
>> "1.2.3" && \ [ -e /etc/foo ] && \ [ `md5sum /etc/foo | cut -d\ -f1`
>> = "6bea09fbb18e4676012105fa5fc726c6" ] then echo "Removing orphaned
>> unmodified configfile /etc/foo" 1>&2 rm /etc/foo fi

> In a discussion that followed from this thread off-list, some people
> agreed that the administrator should be asked what he or she wants
> to do with an obsolete conffile.  The conffile should not be deleted
> silently because other packages may be using the file.

         Then the other package would be in violation of policy, since
 until this version, the confile in question belonged to this package,
 and this package alone. Policy states what needs be done if packages
 want to share conffiles.

	Therefore it should be perfectly acceptable for dpkg to delete
 the conffile, since no other policy compliant package could be using


Bershere's Formula for Failure: There are only two kinds of people who
fail: those who listen to nobody... and those who listen to everybody.
Manoj Srivastava   <srivasta@debian.org>  <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05  CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B  924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C

Reply to: