On Wed, 17 Mar 2010 23:57:09 +0100, Jean-Christophe Dubacq <jcduba...@free.fr> wrote:
Thanks for the questions on IRC yesterday, and for this but report. After some sleep and re-reading some of my changelog entries, this isn't quite as simple as it seemed yesterday. > * I do not understand why /etc/sudoers is not simply a conffile, > especially now that /etc/sudoers.d is supported. History and inertia, mostly. The current processing actually pre-dates clean conffile handling by dpkg, and largely pre-dates my taking over the sudo package from Michael Meskes in 1996. The one reason I can remember this morning to not just replace the current handling without further thought is that removing sudoers on purge can cause problems for people moving systems between sudo and sudo-ldap. Leaving the sudoers file in place on a purge was deemed the least evil choice the last time I reviewed this functionality in April of 2007 in response to #401366. > * the stanza with update-rc.d looks like it will not change anything In most cases, it won't. The code is there because a very old version of sudo created an inappropriate set of links for the startup script fragment. This stanza caused any lingering instances of that mess to be cleaned up. It has been enough years that we can probably remove that code with no penalty... but it certainly does no harm. Bdale
pgpVBjVtLKab4.pgp
Description: PGP signature
