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

Re: Init scripts as conffiles

On Tuesday 15 February 2011 16:44:49 Matt Zagrabelny wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 4:39 PM, Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org> wrote:
> > Matt Zagrabelny wrote:
> >> I understand the difference between remove and purge and the reason to
> >> use both, but removing unmodified conf files seems like a win to me.
> >> Keeps the clutter down.
> > 
> > You'll stop thinking this when apt decides to do an upgrade as follows:
> > 
> > 1. remove foo (and its conffiles)
> > 2. install bar
> > 3. install foo
> > 
> > That is one of the reasons for the current behavior, and temporarily
> > removing a package is how apt deals with certian dependency issues.
> > Renaming a package is another similar reason for the current behavior.
> 1. would remove the unmodified conf file
> 3. would install it
> Did I miss something?

It might be different and incompatible with the conffile(s) (if any) you did 
save.  For example, it might no longer #include (or similar) the conffile that 
was saved.

I would support a --purge-unchanged option, it seems like it could be useful 
in certain circumstances.  However, something like that couldn't be the 
default for the same reason --purge can't be the default.

I'm not sure how such a state would be representing in dpkg.  uninstalled, 
Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.           	 ,= ,-_-. =.
bss@iguanasuicide.net            	((_/)o o(\_))
ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy 	 `-'(. .)`-'
http://iguanasuicide.net/        	     \_/

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Reply to: