[2019-08-12 22:37] Andreas Henriksson <andr...@fatal.se> > > This is how things usually done on non-conffiles. Are there > > additional complications with conffiles? > > Yes, there are many gotchas with conffiles. Extensive testing is > needed.
Yes. We could use semi-automatic tests in Docker, like salsa:kaction/daemons. No, I do not volonteer doing same for this bug. Alternatively, we could do it slower: * util-linux moves files in question into separate package <hwclock> and initscripts adds dependency on it. * initscripts incorporates <hwclock> package. It will require two releases, but may be simplier. > I'd say the two main things to test is that there are no confusion with > unmodified files and also that local modifications (incl. removed files > staying removed) are properly transfered on upgrade. Special care then > also needs to persist until after Bullseye release with further changes > to avoid breaking any of the previous before everyone has upgraded. Sounds bad, like I will have to take ownership of files, but will not be able to edit them until next release. > (Fortunately skipping releases aren't supported on Debian, but for the > benefit of potential downstream distros you might want to ensure this > for a longer time and hold back on modifications that might break the > upgrade/handover of the conffiles.) Even scarier. -- Note, that I send and fetch email in batch, once in a few days. Please, mention in body of your reply when you add or remove recepients.
