Hi Santiago, On 22-03-2021 22:49, Santiago Garcia Mantinan wrote: >>> Fixing a couple of nasty bugs discovered late, >> Yes, due to handling of a new binary package that you had migrated into >> bullseye the day before that wasn't allowed anymore exactly to avoid >> this class of bugs. > > Agreed, this was something that several users had asked for and that we, the > screen team, agreed on making, but nobody had the time till I was able to do > it, yes, it was late on the cycle, but I think we can get it right before > releasing.
I understand your view, but it's not mine a member of the Release Team. The time for changes like these were earlier. We should be ironing out issues that slipped in, not ironing out major restructuring of packages like this. But anyways, for squid in bullseye that ship has sailed. > I thought that leaving the logs which can be even legally needed, wouldn't > hurt, in my case when I found this it was a problem as I lost all the logs I > had on the system (luckily I had a backup). I was under the impression that most packages delete logs when purged. I also read this in the policy (but, as said, it's slightly ambiguous). >> think you're current message is confusing though and needs improvement: >> 1) it doesn't mention the configuration file(s) > > The configuration file (which was forcebly removed by postrm before) is > removed by dpkg if squid and squid-openssl are both purged, so as far as > config goes, it still does what you would spect. Because it used to be removed, I didn't consider it could be a conffile. I just checked and indeed squid-openssl_4.13-8_amd64.deb lists it as such, so that explains, and takes away some of my discomfort. >> 2) it doesn't mention that the log is shared with that other >> (potentially installed) package. There's context missing here for >> sysadmins of why you're not doing it in the package. What happens if >> somebody just did exactly as told and deleted the log directory? > > Agreed, I can try to get a better message on a -9 version of it. Yes please. On 23-03-2021 09:20, Santiago Garcia Mantinan wrote: > So... I'm thinking, what if we don't echo anything and let dpkg do > its work, and leave the note I just added to NEWS and maybe add a > README.Debian file explaining the flavours, how they share the cache, > the logs and the config file and that we are not cleaning logs and > cache, and even sugesting that to clean the cache a mkfs can be > faster (like the comment on the postrm says)?> > What do you think, maybe that way is even cleaner for the user. I agree with the NEWS. I *think* it's slightly better to have the explicit message than "dpkg: warning: while removing squid-openssl, directory '/var/log/squid' not empty" alone. Paul
OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
