Package: udev Version: 255.5-1 Followup-For: Bug #978607 X-Debbugs-Cc: j...@joshtriplett.org
Josh Triplet wrote: > Luca Bocassi wrote: > > On Mon, 1 Feb 2021 21:59:22 -0800 Josh Triplett <josh at joshtriplett.org> > > wrote: > > > On Tue, 29 Dec 2020 14:56:42 -0800 Josh Triplett <josh at > > > joshtriplett.org> wrote: > > > > It looks like those files are installed upstream by the > > > > install-sysconfdir option, which also controls the installation of empty > > > > .d directories and similar, and I think we want to keep the latter. I've > > > > filed https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/18112 about the > > > > possibility of splitting that option. > > > > > > I wrote a patch upstream, which has now been merged. Once that patch is > > > in Debian (whether backported or by shipping a new upstream version), > > > it'll just require setting install-sysconfdir=no-samples. > > > > Unfortunately it's not that simple, due to dpkg's idiosyncrasies, they > > are "conffiles" so special handling is needed to remove them, with > > postinst machinery and whatnot. If you test this and send a MR on Salsa > > I will review it, but I will not do the work myself. > > It turns out that dpkg-maintscript-helper isn't currently able to do > this. The current `rm_conffile` removes unmodified conffiles but renames > modified ones with a `.dpkg-bak` suffix. There's an open feature > request, https://bugs.debian.org/1006655 , requesting an > `rm_conffile_if_unmodified`. I think it'd be appropriate to wait on > that, which would then make this fairly trivial. I wrote a patch for dpkg, implementing the `rm_conffile_if_unmodified` mechanism, along with a declarative version. If dpkg accepts that patch, and debhelper gets upgraded to support it in package.maintscript files, then packages can use this by simultaneously 1) not installing the configuration file anymore, and 2) adding an appropriate `rm_conffile_if_unmodified` line to their package.maintscript file.
