Steve Lamb writes: > Package: dpkg > Version: 1.4.1.1 > Severity: Critical > > While updating listar from .118a to .121a dpkg removed symlinks which > were vital for listar to operate. This is because the maintainer had > changed how his configuration worked and did not warn the administrator in > the upgrade that a major change was forthcoming.
Must this be rehashed AGAIN... For those that don't know, Lamb has been bugging me about this for some time. Let me explain the situation and why dpkg is NOT at fault. In Listar 0.119a, the upstream package acquired new capabilities for specifying pathnames for files in its configuration files. This means that the mess of symlinks previously required were no longer necessary. A small change in /etc/listar/listar.cfg (a listed conffile) makes those symlinks unnecessary. Steve ignored dpkg's prompts about /etc/listar/listar.cfg when he upgraded his listar package. He then claimed that the symlinks should not have disappeared; that I ought to keep them in the .deb ad naseum. He complained that the symlink disappearance caused his server to break. However, others upgraded the package successfully, and despite removing the symlinks in the .deb, managed to make it work by properly updating their config files as dpkg asked. Therefore, I believe that this is not a bug in dpkg, much less a critical one, and can be summarily closed. dpkg did exactly what it was supposed to. Furthermore, if the admin is prompted everytime a file moves, is renamed, or disappears, people will never be able to get their upgrades done. I did not change how the configuration worked; there was a minor change to listar.cfg. dpkg did warn the administrator about the change; there was no need for me to duplicate that. He simply ignored the warnings. Those symlinks were not "vital for listar to operate" after the upgrade. The assumption that the maintainer is not using the files/links/directories is correct if they are no longer present in the .deb. If they were present before, and no longer are, then obviously they are not to be used any longer and *should* be unlinked.
