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

Re: Incorrect use of dpkg conffile suffixes and lintian checks

Roger Leigh wrote:
Hi folks,

I noticed earlier today that many packages are creating copies of
conffiles in their maintainer scripts with the extension ".dpkg-bak",
which is not an extension used or removed by dpkg:

Say you name the file /etc/foo.dpkg-old instead of /etc/foo.dpkg-bak.
dpkg won't remove this file on purge either, as it doesn't have any reference anymore on /etc/foo.

So there is basically no difference here between using *.dpkg-bak or *.dpkg-old. To really cleanup up the backup file, you'd have to do that in postrm/purge. I agree, the wiki should be updated in that regard.

The advantage imho of using *.dpkg-bak is, that you can differentiate which files were created by dpkg and which one by the maintainer scripts.

Maybe it would be a good idea to write a debhelper script (say dh_obsolete), which would create the necessary maintainer scripts. This would avoid to copy the scripts from http://wiki.debian.org/DpkgConffileHandling over and over again.

Regarding run-parts: There is no problem afaik. I quickly tried this:

# mkdir test
# touch test/foo
# touch test/foo.dpkg-old
# touch test/foo.dpkg-bak
# run-parts --list test


Why is it that all of the instruments seeking intelligent life in the
universe are pointed away from Earth?

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply to: