Hi, On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 10:44:56AM +0200, Andreas Beckmann wrote: > Package: im-config > Version: 0.18 > Severity: serious > User: debian...@lists.debian.org > Usertags: piuparts
I maintain im-config and im-switch. > Hi, > > during a test with piuparts I noticed your package modifies conffiles. > This is forbidden by the policy, see > http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-files.html#s-config-files You mean: "configuration files are intended to be modified by the system administrator" .... if my script removed the system administrator modified file, it is violation but I did not do that. My postinst script carefully check modification by the system administrator to avoid it. So I do not think I violated policy in that part. > The proper way to remove an obsolete conffile would be > dpkg-maintscript-helper rm_conffile I understand this is now the new recommended style by dpkg but this not a policy required method yet. (Just like use of "dh" is the new recommended style but it is not a policy required method yet. ) This dpkg-maintscript-helper is, I thought, a new for wheezy. I will fix this and other packages in old style transition for wheezy+1 if possible. Please note this md5sum method was used in pre-97 and it was popular until recently. As long as maintainer is through, it does a good job. (I also remove im-switch file in postinst if they are left without modification but not purged. Otherwise it breaks system. I do not know dpkg-maintscript-helper helps me there. So my postinst removl code needs to stay for im-switch) > although in your case it looks more like a rename to 70im-config_launch, > so > dpkg-maintscript-helper mv_conffile > would be more appropriate. Hmmm.. content changed too. So if we simply move such file, it will create breakage... Anyway, I am not comfortable to impliment safe script for my case with this. Unless md5sum value of such configuration files colide, my old fashioned postinst style works fine for long time. (Even for pre-1997 dpkg). This upload was for post-freeze so my modification was to follow older style and minimalist change policy. As long as I list all md5sum values, it touched files not changed by the local administrator. I do not think piuparts did not change these conffiles. Thus this postinst removed it. If not, this will cause severe breakage. > debsums reports modification of the following files, > from the attached log (scroll to the bottom...): > > debsums: missing file /etc/X11/Xsession.d/80im-config_launch (from > im-config package) Yes, it does as I expected. This is false positive since I check file to be modified or not. I think this is a wishlist bug for the coding style. Osamu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
