Bug#47267: Bug #47267 in pam-apps?
Re: #47267
I have a strong suspicion that the fault here lies with the
pam-apps package -- specifically, with its prerm or postrm.
Unfortunately, as pam-apps is obsolete and I can't find a copy
of the package anywhere, I can't confirm my suspicion.
The hypothesis is that the pam-apps postrm deleted /etc/pam.d/su
on remove or purge. Other packages' postrms have been caught
doing the same (wrong) thing.
In one of the control messages Ben Collins wrote:
> After much investigation, I've concluded that this could
> only be a problem in dpkg. Since there is no way I can
> reproduce it, and the fact that it _should_ work, only means
> that it is not the fault of the packages (since they only
> supply the files, not decide how they get placed/upgraded).
It is not clear from this whether or not B.C. looked at pam-apps's
postrm. That he couldn't reproduce the misbehavior suggests
that he didn't look at it. I don't agree with B.C.'s conclusion
that the problem can only be in dpkg. Packages don't only
supply files, they also contain maintainer scripts -- which can
do naughty things, such as delete conffiles. Conffiles should
be left to dpkg to delete on purge.
Can the originator of the report (Bill Gribble) reproduce the
bug? If not, then I suggest that this report be closed,
as it probably concerns an obsolete package.
--
Thomas Hood
Reply to: