Bug#36972: dpkg: dpkg can remoev vital files/symlinks without warning adminitrator
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, 30 Apr 1999 18:18:49 -0400, Ben Collins wrote:
>So let me get this straight, if tetex moves it's files from (not sure
>if it's the right dir, but...) /usr/lib/tex to /usr/lib/tetex then you
>want dpkg to prompt you for all (possibly) hundreds of files that it is
>removing?
Or at least the single warning.
>If a package breaks on an upgrade, it is the packages fault. dpkg can
>only be but so smart about these things.
Well, I'm in an argument with the maintainer of listar right now about
his package breaking my installation of listar. This is because he lobbied
the Listar folks to have listar define where to find different things. Then
in .119a he removed the symlinks which made pre-.119a versions work. Without
warning from him, the symlinks were removed. He is saying that it is not his
fault because the "fix" is to merge in the config file in. My point is that
it worked before, if the symlinks were still there, it would work after, and
I would prefer that dpkg not guess as to what I intended with those symlinks
because I did like them there and prefered them there.
This, however, brings in the problem that pkg will blindly delete
anything which it thinks is there and it thinks is no longer needed. So,
yes, it would be a pain when tex move things over into tetex, to use your
example. But what if I install files that dpkg later overwrites and then
removes during an upgrade but I need elsewhere? If it drops symlinks that
scripts of mine use?
By heavy-handedly making the assumption that *EVERYTHING* that the
administrator of the system intended is in dpkg a situation is made where
catastrophic breaks are iinevitable
I agree with you, a per file query would be bad. But I do not think that
an accounting of such changes in a single query would be out of line either.
Believe you me, if *something*, either GGoerzen'spackage or dpkg itself told
me that files/links were going to be moved/destroyed and gave me the option
to look over the changes, I would not have lost the 2 days of list mail that
I did.
So what I am proposing is that if dpkg is going to remove links,
directories or files on an upgrade (not install, deinstall, or purge) which
can have an effect on compatibility it throw up a prompt stating just that
with the option to look over the changes. I don't think many of the packages
will be removing files on an upgrade.
Like I said, though, the main concern I have is that something that an
administrator had, preexisting to dpkg, can be overwritten and later removed
by dpkg even though dpkg it not supposed to remove original work by the
administrator unintentionally.
- --
Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your
ICQ: 5107343 | main connection to the switchboard of souls.
- -------------------------------+---------------------------------------------
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPsdk version 1.0 (C) 1997 Pretty Good Privacy, Inc
iQA/AwUBNyou2Hpf7K2LbpnFEQJcQgCaArsAgdIubS7VZqjlG9P7EiA/7OMAn1U1
IzgMuCOd9Z7fHlrlhsbm+i3N
=n6Qr
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: