

Debian bug report logs - #661
does dpkg handle conffiles right?

Package: dpkg ; Reported by: iwj10@cus.cam.ac.uk (Ian Jackson); 85 days
old .
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message received at debian-bugs:


From cus.cam.ac.uk!iwj10 Mon Mar 27 14:43:18 1995
Return-Path: <iwj10@cus.cam.ac.uk>
Received: from pixar.com by mongo.pixar.com with smtp
        (Smail3.1.28.1 #15) id m0rtNVF-0005YxC; Mon, 27 Mar 95 14:43 PST
Received: from bootes.cus.cam.ac.uk by pixar.com with SMTP id AA05417
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for <debian-bugs@pixar.com>); Mon, 27 Mar 1995 
14:43:13 -0800
Received: by bootes.cus.cam.ac.uk 
        (Smail-3.1.29.0 #30) id m0rtNV9-000BzgC; Mon, 27 Mar 95 23:43 
BST
Received: by chiark (Smail3.1.28.1 #3)
        id m0rtM7o-0002gOZ; Mon, 27 Mar 95 22:15 BST
Message-Id: <m0rtM7o-0002gOZ.ijackson@nyx.cs.du.edu>
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 95 22:15 BST
From: iwj10@cus.cam.ac.uk (Ian Jackson)
To: debian-bugs@pixar.com
Subject: Re: does dpkg handle conffiles right?

Package: dpkg
Version: 0.93.31

Raul Miller writes ("does dpkg handle conffiles right?"):
> I thought that dpkg was going to do something to record what a
> configuration file looked like when it was originally unpacked.  As it
> is, every time a package is upgradded with a changed conffile the
> sysadmin gets a prompt about the change -- even if the sysadmin never
> changed the conffile in question.

The user will be prompted if the version of the configuration file
shipped by the package maintainer in the new package is neither the
same as the version shipped by the maintainer in the version being
overwritten nor the same as the file currently installed on the
system.

The default answer is always to overwrite the sysadmin's file with the
package maintainer's file.

Umm, there seems to be insufficient flexibility in this area.  We have
the following possibilities, with the current default actions listed:

 Currently:                     User edited             User not edited
        Maintainer changed       prompt(overwrite)       
prompt(overwrite)
        Maintainer not changed   keep old                keep old

However, the current scheme doesn't allow you to set different values
for what to do when the user has edited the file.  Ie, you can set the
entries in each row to prompt(overwrite), prompt(keep old), overwrite
or keep old, but you can't set entries in the same row to different
values.

I think what you're asking for is:

                                User edited             User not edited
        Maintainer changed       prompt(keep old)        overwrite
        Maintainer not changed   keep old                keep old

or something like it.  Am I right ?  If so, I think this is probably a
reasonable requirement.  I've therefore sent this to debian-bugs.
Don't expect it to be implemented before the C rewrite of dpkg.

Perhaps someone would like to come up with a consistent, sensible and
reasonably helpful way of organising the setting of these cells to
sane values from the command line.

Umm, it would probably be a good thing if there wasn't any way to ask
for a cell more to the right to be less likely to install the new
file, or for a cell nearer the top to be less likely to do so than one
in the same column further down.

Ian.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Acknowledgement sent to iwj10@cus.cam.ac.uk (Ian Jackson) :
New bug report received and forwarded. Full text available.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Report forwarded to debian-devel@pixar.com :
Bug#661 ; Package dpkg ; Resent-Message-ID:
<debian-bugs-handler.661.03272244362953@pixar.com> . Full text
available.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ian Jackson / iwj10@thor.cam.ac.uk , with the debian-bugs tracking
mechanism
This page last modified 06:43:02 GMT Wed 21 Jun