On 2024-07-27 09:26:49 -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> > On 2024-07-26, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> > 
> > > The /etc/sysctl.d/99-sysctl.conf symlink has been removed
> > > (currently in unstable) *without any announcement*, so that
> > > the /etc/sysctl.conf file (which is still documented, BTW)
> > > is no longer read.
> > >
> > > So, be careful if you have important settings there (security...).
> 
> I kept wondering: what does this have to do with the Subject
> header?  The files in question belong to the procps package, not
> to systemd, right?

The configuration got broken by a *systemd* upgrade:

  * Drop /etc/sysctl.d/99-sysctl.conf symlink procps no longer ships
    /etc/sysctl.conf (Closes: #1076190)

> As it turns out, it's a combination of the two packages.  In bookworm,
> /etc/sysctl.conf is a Conffile of the procps package, and
> /etc/sysctl.d/99-sysctl.conf is a regular file (non-Conffile) of
> the systemd package.

What does a regular file make different compared to a conffile
concerning its handling?

> In unstable, apparently, *both* of them are gone.

No, /etc/sysctl.conf is not gone on existing installations.
It is just no longer read.

> <https://metadata.ftp-master.debian.org/changelogs//main/s/systemd/systemd_256.4-2_changelog>
>  says:
>   [ Luca Boccassi ]
>   * Drop /etc/sysctl.d/99-sysctl.conf symlink procps no longer ships
>     /etc/sysctl.conf (Closes: #1076190)

/etc/sysctl.conf is no longer shipped only for *new* installations.
But /etc/sysctl.d/99-sysctl.conf got removed also for *existing*
installations.

> while 
> <https://metadata.ftp-master.debian.org/changelogs//main/p/procps/procps_4.0.4-5_changelog>
>  says:
> procps (2:4.0.4-5) unstable; urgency=medium
> 
>   * Add Recommends: linux-sysctl-defaults Closes: #1074156
>   * Remove /etc/sysctl.conf as using /etc/sysctl.d/*.conf is better
>   * Updated /etc/sysctld.d/README

only for *new* installations.

There's a bug about it (about existing installations). But the systemd
change should have been done *after* the future correction of procps
in order not to break configuration.

-- 
Vincent Lefèvre <vinc...@vinc17.net> - Web: <https://www.vinc17.net/>
100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <https://www.vinc17.net/blog/>
Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / AriC project (LIP, ENS-Lyon)

Reply via email to