On Thu, May 01, 2008 at 05:23:03PM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote: > Even with the -u option it can return a non-zero state. Even if it > fixes the problem in some case, it's just a workaround for the real > problem that the lock file doesn't get removed in the error case.
This is way do not touch /etc/network/if-up.d/ntpdate before You fix it. But You are right: it is not for all cases. > I have no idea what you mean with "new problem". On the next upgrade this problem are shown in subject of this thread. > So that would only leave the files left that dpkg might have created > because the conffile was changed, which I really don't consider a > problem. This is not problem, this is bad style. The examples of right practice is apache or mutt where user's config files are sourced by ones installed with packages. This way user don't need to edit config files every time when some changes come into it with upgrade process. You should revise config because some old settings may be incompatible with new version. When You give users opportunity to maintain separate config file, the cases when they should edit config after upgrade will be minimized. ********************************** **** Vladimir Stavrinov ****** ******* [EMAIL PROTECTED] ********** ***** http://inist.ru/ ******* ********************************** -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
