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

Re: apt-diff: a tool to diff filesystem content against APT

Osamu Aoki <osamu@debian.org> writes:

> On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 12:06:45AM +0900, Osamu Aoki wrote:
>> Hi,
>> On Wed, Dec 08, 2010 at 12:52:28PM -0800, Tristan Schmelcher wrote:
>> > On Tue, Dec 7, 2010 at 11:30 PM, Goswin von Brederlow <goswin-v-b@web.de> wrote:
>> > > Tristan Schmelcher <tristan.schmelcher@gmail.com> writes:
>> > >>> how does it deal with configurations generated in postinstall?
>> > I find debsums to be too basic for my needs. apt-diff is my attempt to
>> > improve upon it. I often want to answer the question "how does package
>> > X on my machine compare to a pristine installation?" debsums only
>> > gives part of the answer. It can't check files that are missing
>> > md5sums (which includes a lot of conffiles)
>                                      ~~~~~~~~~
>> Wrong. 
> OOps..  I now see your point.  Sorry.
>> If you configure debsum correctly following manpage, md5sums are
>> available for all packages.  Use -g option to initialize it and make
>> sure to set the debconf boolean value debsums/apt-autogen to be "true".
>> I understand that this is an exra hussle.
> This is talking about files missing md5sums due to packaging practice of
> the maintainer.  conffiles are not debsums interest.

Does debsums support ucf? Can it support ucf?

What I mean is that often generated conffiles are installed with ucf and
ucf keeps track of the original generated checksum and the possibly
localy modified file and such. Does/could debsums tap into that info to
find generated conffiles that were changed?

> By the way, etckeeper is the way to track /etc history to me.  Some
> conffile are generated by postinst.  So not all files in /etc are in
> package as file.
>> Making this easy is step in right direction as long as it is written in
>> effective way.  (In order to improve debsum, we should know it well.
>> Debsum tries to avoid downloading package as much as possible.
> Osamu)


Reply to: