On Fri, Jun 20, 2025 at 08:58:58AM -0500, David Wright wrote: > On Fri 20 Jun 2025 at 08:28:11 (+0200), tomas@tuxteam.de wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 19, 2025 at 05:40:24PM -0400, Jeffrey Walton wrote: > > > > [...] > > > > > It might be worth mentioning that if the package owns sources.list, > > > then you should not edit it. You should allow the package maintainer > > > to edit or replace sources.list. Place your changes in > > > /etc/apt/sources.list.d/. > > > > tomas@caliban:~$ dpkg -S /etc/apt/sources.list > > dpkg-query: no path found matching pattern /etc/apt/sources.list > > > > It seems no package "owns" sources.list. Besides, it's in /etc, so by > > convention it would be a conffile [1], i.e. Debian expects the sysadmin > > to change things and copes with it. > > I don't think that's correct. The term "conffiles" applies to the > files listed in a package's DEBIAN/conffiles, with their md5sums > recorded in /var/lib/dpkg/info/<package>.list. When they've been > modified, upgrading the package gives you a dialogue: > > Configuration file '<CONFFILE>' > ==> Modified (by you or by a script) since installation. > ==> Package distributor has shipped an updated version. > What would you like to do about it ? Your options are: > Y or I : install the package maintainer's version > N or O : keep your currently-installed version > D : show the differences between the versions > Z : start a shell to examine the situation > The default action is to keep your current version. > *** <CONFFILE> (Y/I/N/O/D/Z) [default=N] ? y > Installing new version of config file <CONFFILE> ... > > So sources.list is a configuration file, but not a conffile. I've been ambiguous: "so by convention it would be a conffile" was a very short form of "...if it were 'owned' by a package". But it is not. Of course you are right. Cheers -- t
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature