Bug#1051577: iproute2: obsolete conffiles
On Wed, 13 Sept 2023 at 10:44, Ian Campbell wrote: > > On Tue, 2023-09-12 at 23:13 +0200, Luca Boccassi wrote: > > On Mon, 11 Sept 2023 at 15:57, Daniel Gröber > > wrote: > > > > > > Hi Luca, > > > > > > On Mon, Sep 11, 2023 at 01:06:06PM +0100, Luca Boccassi wrote: > > > > > I want to question whether removing these conffiles is a good idea at > > > > > all. I'm probably one of the few people that actually muck around in > > > > > there > > > > > but it seems like this is going to break things for any users that do. > > > > > > > > As far as I understand dpkg's conffile machinery should recognize if > > > > you changed anything, and leave it in place. Upstream moved the > > > > default ones to /usr, so we just follow what they do. > > > > > > Right. Think of an admin having to adjust these config files though: > > > previously they could just `editor /etc/iproute2/rt_tables` and get on > > > with > > > things. Now anyone needing to do that will have to do a doubletake, figure > > > out why /etc/iproute2 is missing, realize that it's at /usr/lib/iproute2 > > > now, copy that over and finally edit. > > > > > > Is that friction really warrented to cater to a specialized niche > > > use-case? > > > > > > Please consider overriding upstream's decision here. > > > > Yes, it is warranted, both because it's exactly the correct behaviour > > for a package, and also because we are certainly not spending time and > > resources to go against upstream choices, especially when they are the > > right choices. > > What is the plan for handling updates? AIUI we've lost the dpkg > conffile handling but it doesn't look like it's been replaced by > anything (e.g. like using ucf to prompt when an update happened > perhaps?). Same as everything else that uses drop-ins and hermetic-usr since forever. No more pointless noise and wasting time solving conflicts by hand in whitespace changes, comment typos and so on.
Bug#1051577: iproute2: obsolete conffiles
On Tue, 2023-09-12 at 23:13 +0200, Luca Boccassi wrote: > On Mon, 11 Sept 2023 at 15:57, Daniel Gröber > wrote: > > > > Hi Luca, > > > > On Mon, Sep 11, 2023 at 01:06:06PM +0100, Luca Boccassi wrote: > > > > I want to question whether removing these conffiles is a good idea at > > > > all. I'm probably one of the few people that actually muck around in > > > > there > > > > but it seems like this is going to break things for any users that do. > > > > > > As far as I understand dpkg's conffile machinery should recognize if > > > you changed anything, and leave it in place. Upstream moved the > > > default ones to /usr, so we just follow what they do. > > > > Right. Think of an admin having to adjust these config files though: > > previously they could just `editor /etc/iproute2/rt_tables` and get on with > > things. Now anyone needing to do that will have to do a doubletake, figure > > out why /etc/iproute2 is missing, realize that it's at /usr/lib/iproute2 > > now, copy that over and finally edit. > > > > Is that friction really warrented to cater to a specialized niche use-case? > > > > Please consider overriding upstream's decision here. > > Yes, it is warranted, both because it's exactly the correct behaviour > for a package, and also because we are certainly not spending time and > resources to go against upstream choices, especially when they are the > right choices. What is the plan for handling updates? AIUI we've lost the dpkg conffile handling but it doesn't look like it's been replaced by anything (e.g. like using ucf to prompt when an update happened perhaps?). Ian.
Bug#1051577: iproute2: obsolete conffiles
On Mon, 11 Sept 2023 at 15:57, Daniel Gröber wrote: > > Hi Luca, > > On Mon, Sep 11, 2023 at 01:06:06PM +0100, Luca Boccassi wrote: > > > I want to question whether removing these conffiles is a good idea at > > > all. I'm probably one of the few people that actually muck around in there > > > but it seems like this is going to break things for any users that do. > > > > As far as I understand dpkg's conffile machinery should recognize if > > you changed anything, and leave it in place. Upstream moved the > > default ones to /usr, so we just follow what they do. > > Right. Think of an admin having to adjust these config files though: > previously they could just `editor /etc/iproute2/rt_tables` and get on with > things. Now anyone needing to do that will have to do a doubletake, figure > out why /etc/iproute2 is missing, realize that it's at /usr/lib/iproute2 > now, copy that over and finally edit. > > Is that friction really warrented to cater to a specialized niche use-case? > > Please consider overriding upstream's decision here. Yes, it is warranted, both because it's exactly the correct behaviour for a package, and also because we are certainly not spending time and resources to go against upstream choices, especially when they are the right choices.
Processed: Re: Bug#1051577: iproute2: obsolete conffiles
Processing control commands:
> severity -1 serious
Bug #1051577 {Done: Luca Boccassi } [iproute2] iproute2:
obsolete conffiles
Severity set to 'serious' from 'normal'
--
1051577: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1051577
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Bug#1051577: iproute2: obsolete conffiles
Control: severity -1 serious (stop migration until I have time to further fix it) On Mon, 11 Sept 2023 at 15:56, Bastian Blank wrote: > > On Mon, Sep 11, 2023 at 01:06:06PM +0100, Luca Boccassi wrote: > > As far as I understand dpkg's conffile machinery should recognize if > > you changed anything, and leave it in place. Upstream moved the > > default ones to /usr, so we just follow what they do. > > Actually using rm_conffile is wrong. This moves the file to > *.dpkg-bak. However the expected behaviour is to keep them around > without renaming, just removed from the dpkg database. I see - I will do that next week, as I am travelling this week, so bumping severity to stop migration
Bug#1051577: iproute2: obsolete conffiles
Hi Luca, On Mon, Sep 11, 2023 at 01:06:06PM +0100, Luca Boccassi wrote: > > I want to question whether removing these conffiles is a good idea at > > all. I'm probably one of the few people that actually muck around in there > > but it seems like this is going to break things for any users that do. > > As far as I understand dpkg's conffile machinery should recognize if > you changed anything, and leave it in place. Upstream moved the > default ones to /usr, so we just follow what they do. Right. Think of an admin having to adjust these config files though: previously they could just `editor /etc/iproute2/rt_tables` and get on with things. Now anyone needing to do that will have to do a doubletake, figure out why /etc/iproute2 is missing, realize that it's at /usr/lib/iproute2 now, copy that over and finally edit. Is that friction really warrented to cater to a specialized niche use-case? Please consider overriding upstream's decision here. --Daniel signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Bug#1051577: iproute2: obsolete conffiles
On Mon, Sep 11, 2023 at 01:06:06PM +0100, Luca Boccassi wrote: > As far as I understand dpkg's conffile machinery should recognize if > you changed anything, and leave it in place. Upstream moved the > default ones to /usr, so we just follow what they do. Actually using rm_conffile is wrong. This moves the file to *.dpkg-bak. However the expected behaviour is to keep them around without renaming, just removed from the dpkg database. Bastian -- "That unit is a woman." "A mass of conflicting impulses." -- Spock and Nomad, "The Changeling", stardate 3541.9
Bug#1051577: iproute2: obsolete conffiles
On Mon, 11 Sept 2023 at 13:03, Daniel Gröber wrote: > > Hi, > > On Mon, Sep 11, 2023 at 08:32:10AM +0200, Sven Joachim wrote: > > > After upgrading to 6.5.0-1 adequate shows: > > > > > > adequate found packaging bugs > > > - > > > > > > iproute2: obsolete-conffile /etc/iproute2/rt_tables.d/README > > > iproute2: obsolete-conffile /etc/iproute2/rt_protos.d/README > > > iproute2: obsolete-conffile /etc/iproute2/rt_protos > > > iproute2: obsolete-conffile /etc/iproute2/rt_dsfield > > > iproute2: obsolete-conffile /etc/iproute2/nl_protos > > > iproute2: obsolete-conffile /etc/iproute2/ematch_map > > > iproute2: obsolete-conffile /etc/iproute2/bpf_pinning > > > > There are a few more leftovers still present in 6.5.0-2: > > > > , > > | $ adequate iproute2 > > | iproute2: obsolete-conffile /etc/iproute2/group > > | iproute2: obsolete-conffile /etc/iproute2/rt_realms > > | iproute2: obsolete-conffile /etc/iproute2/rt_scopes > > | iproute2: obsolete-conffile /etc/iproute2/rt_tables > > ` > > > > There are also the directories /etc/iproute2/rt_protos.d, > > /etc/iproute2/rt_tables.d and /etc/iproute2 which are no longer shipped > > in the package. Unfortunately dpkg-maintscript-helper does not clean > > those up automatically (see #584185). > > I want to question whether removing these conffiles is a good idea at > all. I'm probably one of the few people that actually muck around in there > but it seems like this is going to break things for any users that do. > > Is it really sensible to move these files to /usr/lib in the standard > Debian installation? It seems to me upstream only wants to better support > /usr-only deployments without /etc: > > commit 0a0a8f12fa1b03dd0ccbebf5f85209d1c8a0f580 > Read configuration files from /etc and /usr > > Add support for the so called "stateless" configuration pattern (read > from /etc, fall back to /usr), giving system administrators a way to > define local configuration without changing any distro-provided files. > > In practice this means that each configuration file FOO is loaded > from /usr/lib/iproute2/FOO unless /etc/iproute2/FOO exists. > > So why not simply keep the conffiles in /etc for regular admins and let > people that want to do image based deployments create /usr/lib/iproute2 if > they want to override or remove /etc? As far as I understand dpkg's conffile machinery should recognize if you changed anything, and leave it in place. Upstream moved the default ones to /usr, so we just follow what they do.
Bug#1051577: iproute2: obsolete conffiles
Hi, On Mon, Sep 11, 2023 at 08:32:10AM +0200, Sven Joachim wrote: > > After upgrading to 6.5.0-1 adequate shows: > > > > adequate found packaging bugs > > - > > > > iproute2: obsolete-conffile /etc/iproute2/rt_tables.d/README > > iproute2: obsolete-conffile /etc/iproute2/rt_protos.d/README > > iproute2: obsolete-conffile /etc/iproute2/rt_protos > > iproute2: obsolete-conffile /etc/iproute2/rt_dsfield > > iproute2: obsolete-conffile /etc/iproute2/nl_protos > > iproute2: obsolete-conffile /etc/iproute2/ematch_map > > iproute2: obsolete-conffile /etc/iproute2/bpf_pinning > > There are a few more leftovers still present in 6.5.0-2: > > , > | $ adequate iproute2 > | iproute2: obsolete-conffile /etc/iproute2/group > | iproute2: obsolete-conffile /etc/iproute2/rt_realms > | iproute2: obsolete-conffile /etc/iproute2/rt_scopes > | iproute2: obsolete-conffile /etc/iproute2/rt_tables > ` > > There are also the directories /etc/iproute2/rt_protos.d, > /etc/iproute2/rt_tables.d and /etc/iproute2 which are no longer shipped > in the package. Unfortunately dpkg-maintscript-helper does not clean > those up automatically (see #584185). I want to question whether removing these conffiles is a good idea at all. I'm probably one of the few people that actually muck around in there but it seems like this is going to break things for any users that do. Is it really sensible to move these files to /usr/lib in the standard Debian installation? It seems to me upstream only wants to better support /usr-only deployments without /etc: commit 0a0a8f12fa1b03dd0ccbebf5f85209d1c8a0f580 Read configuration files from /etc and /usr Add support for the so called "stateless" configuration pattern (read from /etc, fall back to /usr), giving system administrators a way to define local configuration without changing any distro-provided files. In practice this means that each configuration file FOO is loaded from /usr/lib/iproute2/FOO unless /etc/iproute2/FOO exists. So why not simply keep the conffiles in /etc for regular admins and let people that want to do image based deployments create /usr/lib/iproute2 if they want to override or remove /etc? --Daniel signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Bug#1051577: iproute2: obsolete conffiles
Control: found -1 6.5.0-2 On 2023-09-10 00:55 +0200, gregor herrmann wrote: > Package: iproute2 > Version: 6.5.0-1 > Severity: normal > > After upgrading to 6.5.0-1 adequate shows: > > adequate found packaging bugs > - > > iproute2: obsolete-conffile /etc/iproute2/rt_tables.d/README > iproute2: obsolete-conffile /etc/iproute2/rt_protos.d/README > iproute2: obsolete-conffile /etc/iproute2/rt_protos > iproute2: obsolete-conffile /etc/iproute2/rt_dsfield > iproute2: obsolete-conffile /etc/iproute2/nl_protos > iproute2: obsolete-conffile /etc/iproute2/ematch_map > iproute2: obsolete-conffile /etc/iproute2/bpf_pinning There are a few more leftovers still present in 6.5.0-2: , | $ adequate iproute2 | iproute2: obsolete-conffile /etc/iproute2/group | iproute2: obsolete-conffile /etc/iproute2/rt_realms | iproute2: obsolete-conffile /etc/iproute2/rt_scopes | iproute2: obsolete-conffile /etc/iproute2/rt_tables ` There are also the directories /etc/iproute2/rt_protos.d, /etc/iproute2/rt_tables.d and /etc/iproute2 which are no longer shipped in the package. Unfortunately dpkg-maintscript-helper does not clean those up automatically (see #584185). Cheers, Sven
Processed: Re: Bug#1051577: iproute2: obsolete conffiles
Processing control commands:
> found -1 6.5.0-2
Bug #1051577 {Done: Luca Boccassi } [iproute2] iproute2:
obsolete conffiles
Marked as found in versions iproute2/6.5.0-2; no longer marked as fixed in
versions iproute2/6.5.0-2 and reopened.
--
1051577: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1051577
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Bug#1051577: iproute2: obsolete conffiles
Package: iproute2 Version: 6.5.0-1 Severity: normal -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 After upgrading to 6.5.0-1 adequate shows: adequate found packaging bugs - - iproute2: obsolete-conffile /etc/iproute2/rt_tables.d/README iproute2: obsolete-conffile /etc/iproute2/rt_protos.d/README iproute2: obsolete-conffile /etc/iproute2/rt_protos iproute2: obsolete-conffile /etc/iproute2/rt_dsfield iproute2: obsolete-conffile /etc/iproute2/nl_protos iproute2: obsolete-conffile /etc/iproute2/ematch_map iproute2: obsolete-conffile /etc/iproute2/bpf_pinning Cf. dpkg-maintscript-helper(1) and dh_installdeb(1) / package.maintscript / rm_conffile. Cheers, gregor -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iQKTBAEBCgB9FiEE0eExbpOnYKgQTYX6uzpoAYZJqgYFAmT898hfFIAALgAo aXNzdWVyLWZwckBub3RhdGlvbnMub3BlbnBncC5maWZ0aGhvcnNlbWFuLm5ldEQx RTEzMTZFOTNBNzYwQTgxMDREODVGQUJCM0E2ODAxODY0OUFBMDYACgkQuzpoAYZJ qgZ76hAAvpluUC3obOOsJfmXhh48GqVoLEt/7wg2B7WR73f21nGSTMUP+nzDSE8W JwkGRIP8aT6eiHfh8zHj83Ey0r4IZ9g/OlMzyqCq7jDRzPo3fmy6Z3tJePGFO5Qg nYmZwQA9DA+ANUi0A9BqNvgofguXh9KxIk5k2Gd2M8P5OBPvcXuVBuXtARwPljVw 7wA+niYFUyjkL1rgj1eBdiwzzldyUJiGC4/cve2fkmQyXqtocTqWjQTEXa1zYRGn zRsCCyRdD0lJl/DqKTHspPyM/BAbWJbVnUPZ0Kn0LJAcvaUuOH+U4UAJTCshzaNM XzuAHx39Hh90SbRYvikASBPJX3s1jhOBTuJkH6qWjgtgQfSyElvujHqzOwUr73xX K5Ew9wDBAEbC5JDs4pLZGBQLUWmocQdAKRikPkScSqTpU+s/RIgwzg7uGsVK2tSo dO7zN6Q08NusJT6T4c7AYgSEHiLsH0rIHA7jY/x9roZ+X57Hg36YRGLdIL5UG74k 1dIgRZh4CpJZdmD28x5lW5Zk2oKE+x3GDhiZKuhoKJBSfH4CbNbHc3n4PkAIlBAD i2oxEkO20DwuJTiVmsQvDmYRWLOaSvA6Ffi02H78LQ3+QCFjXdKLIsm5Ex3wD7Me p+tSaEI4OE3VeaFY5xXnr20PIVe/7cf7TUAseyLB59vQk17tSIk= =dToJ -END PGP SIGNATURE-
