Re: NEVER remove log files without asking

[Erwin Brandstetter <a9006241@unet.univie.ac.at>]

Steve Greenland wrote:
> On 16-Aug-04, 17:41 (CDT), "Jamin W. Collins" <jcollins@asgardsrealm.net> wrote: 
>
> > And what about other directories?  Such as /var/lib/$package/ or
> > /usr/share/$package/, is the admin to assume that these directories are
> > also sacrosanct and owned by the package?  That their sub-directories or
> > contents can be removed even though the files may not have been created
> > by the package?
>
>
> The difference is that Policy doesn't mandate the removal of those
> files.
>
>
> > Err on the side of caution, don't blindly remove directories that may
> > contain files your package didn't put there.  If you're not very certain
> > the files were created by your package don't remove them.
>
>
> In general, yes. But I don't think it's unreasonable for the apache
> maintainer to assume that /var/log/apache is full of apache log files,
> put there by apache. How is the postrm supposed to distinguish log files
> it's supposed to remove, because Policy 10.8 requires it, vs. log files
> that the user wants to keep? Just those named 'access.log'? Or is it
> 'access.log.*'. Or 'access.log.*' in subdirs?
>
> Is it wrong for package foobar to 'rm -rf /var/cache/foobar' when it is
> purged?

As it has become obvious, that to some (even experienced) users it is 
_not_ obvious what is going to be deleted upon issuing -purge, maybe the 
solution of Solomon might be this:
Purge those directories in question
/var/log/foobar
/var/cache/foobar
/what/else?
with whatever files and subdirectories in it regardless.
_But_ issue a warning naming those directories when -purge is being 
requested _before_ proceeding.

(Just my conclusion from the discussion, I don't know the internals of 
package removal)


Regards
Erwin

Not subscribed to this list.