Your message dated Thu, 8 Dec 2016 01:24:58 +0100
with message-id <20161208002458.dwkcltuddbng5...@gaara.hadrons.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#847357: dpkg: dpkg does not reinstall removed/lost
conffiles unless forced to
has caused the Debian Bug report #847357,
regarding dpkg: dpkg does not reinstall removed/lost conffiles unless forced to
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)
--
847357: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=847357
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Source: dpkg
Version: 1.18.15
Severity: serious
Affects apt
Hello,
I'm now filing the bug against dpkg as promised, see below:
>From debian-devel on November 30 2016:
On Tue, 2016-11-29 at 19:18 +0100, Simon Richter wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 29.11.2016 17:58, Svante Signell wrote:
>
> > After upgrading to sid the conffiles don't seem to be installed any longer?
> > Examples are bash, passwd, basefiles and libpam-runtime. Especially the
> > last one cost me a day debugging to find out why logins crashed. What is
causing this, do I have some settings disabling conffiles?
> The usual rule applies: if dpkg thinks the conffile has been
> deliberately deleted, it will not install a new version on top. The
> question is how that happened.
The probable cause was a hardware error om my SSD disk. Subsequent disk checking
wiped out several files, among them the important conffiles.
> To force reinstallation of configuration files, invoke dpkg with the
> "--force-confmiss" option when installing. This will only restore
> missing configuration files, but not overwrite changed ones. If some
> configuration files were damaged, you can use "--force-confnew" to
> unpack all configuration files; your old files can be found with a
> ".dpkg-old" suffix then.
A problem with essential and important packages is that you can only reinstall
them. So apt-get install --reinstall or dpkg -i <path_to_deb> only reinstalls
the package, not the conffiles. Now I know how to get the conffiles back, but
tracing which packages has them is hard: Any ideas?
Anyway, I think the default behaviour of dpkg is wrong: If you have
intentionally or by accident removed some conffiles, they should be installed by
default with a reinstall. I'll file a serious bug on dpkg for it.
Thanks!
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
severity 847357 wishlist
tags 847357 wontfix
thanks
On Wed, 2016-12-07 at 15:11:40 +0100, Svante Signell wrote:
> Source: dpkg
> Version: 1.18.15
> Severity: serious
> Affects apt
> I'm now filing the bug against dpkg as promised, see below:
Why? On the same thread you started on debian-devel, you were told
this was done on purpose and by design…
> >From debian-devel on November 30 2016:
> On Tue, 2016-11-29 at 19:18 +0100, Simon Richter wrote:
> > On 29.11.2016 17:58, Svante Signell wrote:
> > To force reinstallation of configuration files, invoke dpkg with the
> > "--force-confmiss" option when installing. This will only restore
> > missing configuration files, but not overwrite changed ones. If some
> > configuration files were damaged, you can use "--force-confnew" to
> > unpack all configuration files; your old files can be found with a
> > ".dpkg-old" suffix then.
>
> A problem with essential and important packages is that you can only reinstall
> them. So apt-get install --reinstall or dpkg -i <path_to_deb> only reinstalls
> the package, not the conffiles. Now I know how to get the conffiles back, but
> tracing which packages has them is hard: Any ideas?
>
> Anyway, I think the default behaviour of dpkg is wrong: If you have
> intentionally or by accident removed some conffiles, they should be installed
> by
> default with a reinstall. I'll file a serious bug on dpkg for it.
No, they should not. Closing this as wontfix.
Thanks,
Guillem
--- End Message ---
