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

Bug#269828: tetex-base: Provide script to purge old map files



Ross Boylan <RossBoylan@stanfordalumni.org> schrieb:

> On Sat, Sep 04, 2004 at 11:15:59AM +0200, Frank Küster wrote:
>> Ross Boylan <RossBoylan@stanfordalumni.org> schrieb:
>> 
>> > Package: tetex-base
>> > Version: 2.0.2b-3
>> > Severity: wishlist
>> >
>> > README.Debian.gz, in the second major section, indicates there are a
>> > bunch of map files that are no longer used, but that Debian policy
>> > prohibits removing them.
>> >
>> > Could you provide a script that removes them, for those who wish too?
>> 
>> You can use /usr/share/doc/tetex-base/remove-oldmaps. But a pointer to
>> it in tetex-base's README.Debian is missing.
>> 
>> > First, should a thorough removal also modify
>> > /var/lib/dpkg/info/tetex-{base,extra}.conffiles?  If so, how?
>> 
>> Which modifications do you mean? The old conffiles are yet removed from
>> that file, if they are no longer in the deb.
> I don't follow the "yet" in the previous sentence.  I assume the
> meaning is that the old conffiles are removed....

The old conffiles are removed if the administrator removes them - this
cannot be done by the package, because it would be against Debian
Policy.

But the record of the conffiles in
/var/lib/dpkg/info/tetex-{base,extra}.conffiles is removed as soon as
the packages are upgraded to a version that does not provide them. I
could not find anything explicit on this in the Policy, but I tried it:
I logged into a sid chroot, included a woody line in sources.list and
installed woody's tetex-base. Then I upgraded to sid, and there was no
record in tetex-base.conffiles of those files.

Did you notice something different?

> The modification I meant was removing the files from
> *{base,extra}.conffiles, but it seems that's taken care of.  The
> README says "(but still be registered in
> /var/lib/dpkg/info/tetex-{base,extra}.conffiles)".  I thought that
> meant the indicated {base,extra}.conffiles would still have entries
> for the deleted files, and needed to be cleaned up.

No, that means that sometimes I'm talking (or rather writing)
rubbish. Thanks for the hint.

> I suggest the following changes:
> 1. Mention remove-oldmaps (perhaps adding you need to be root, though
> that's pretty obvious).
> 2. Make remove-oldmaps executable (if that's not against policy).

It would be, I think. And it doesn't hurt if people have to think twice
before executing it. There's a reason why dpkg does not remove obsolete
conffiles, namely because people may have local changes in there.

> 3. Change "Therefore, if you used testing, unstable or
> some backports after woody's release, they might not exist on your
> system (but still be registered in
> /var/lib/dpkg/info/tetex-{base,extra}.conffiles)." to
> "So if you used testing, unstable or some backports after woody's
> release, the files may already be deleted."
> I think the original parenthetical remark only adds confusion.  At
> least, it seems to have confused me!

Yes, that should be changed.

> 4. It might be good to add, at the end of section 2,
> "Do NOT delete other files in the directory, which continues to be
> used.  

I have checked in the patch attached below.

Regards, Frank

--- tetex-base/debian/README.debian	2004/07/21 14:21:56	1.10
+++ tetex-base/debian/README.debian	2004/09/04 17:33:50	1.11
@@ -155,15 +155,21 @@
 2. Changes in handling of map files (unneeded files in /etc/texmf/dvips)
 -----------------------------------------------------------------------
 
-The following files in /etc/texmf/dvips/ used to be conffiles (i.e.,
+Font map files previously were installed as conffiles (i.e.,
 configuration files managed by dpkg) in older versions of tetex-base
-and tetex-extra (e.g. in woody), but are not included and not used in
-current versions - some were also managed by ucf. Because of Debian
-Policy and dpkg's way to handle conffiles, they will not be removed
-when you upgrade, although they are useless. You can quite safely
-delete them (but then you won't be able to downgrade any more unless
-you purge the packages). Any changes you made previously in these
-files will no longer have any effect.
+and tetex-extra (e.g. in woody) in /etc/texmf/dvips. Since it is in
+fact not necessary to change them, they are now treated as ordinary
+files and installed below /usr/share/texmf/dvips. Because of Debian
+Policy and dpkg's way to handle conffiles, the copies in
+/etc/texmf/dvips will not be removed when you upgrade, although they
+are useless. You can quite safely delete them (but then you won't be
+able to downgrade any more unless you purge the packages). Any changes
+you made previously in these files will no longer have any effect.
+
+It is usually a good idea to remove those files if you have not
+changed them. You can use the script
+/usr/share/doc/tetex-base/remove-oldmaps to do this. The list of files
+is: 
 
 antp.cfg antt.cfg pl.cfg
 config.qf 
@@ -184,8 +190,12 @@
 Some intermediate versions of tetex deleted those files in maintainer
 scripts (which was a bug). Therefore, if you used testing, unstable or
 some backports after woody's release, they might not exist on your
-system (but still be registered in
-/var/lib/dpkg/info/tetex-{base,extra}.conffiles).
+system. 
+
+Do NOT delete other files in the directory, which continues to be
+used. 
+
+
 
 
 3. Construction of tetex-base_2.0.2a.orig.tar.gz from the upstream

-- 
Frank Küster, Biozentrum der Univ. Basel
Abt. Biophysikalische Chemie




Reply to: