On Mon, Jan 03, 2011 at 09:17:34AM +0100, Javier Fernandez-Sanguino wrote: > Yes, that's one I'm thinking of doing anyway, but did not want to > introduce just yet to minimize the changes and make it possible for > this package to go through the freeze.
Ah, this is an argument.
> It might be that when this bug was around (#608635) the conffile
> handling did not work properly. It probably did not automatically
> detect that the file had not been changed by the user, and attributed
> the '-p' vs '-p -p' difference to a local change when it was really a
> postinst change. Now, with this bug fixed it should be transparent to
> users that have snort/disable_promiscuous to true.
>
> If you can, you could purge snort, downgrade to 2.8.5.2-2 (in testing)
> and then upgrade to 2.8.5.2-7 (reconfiguring snort in the process) to
> verify this.
Yes, the code looks good.
But since I'm at least trying to be a friendly guy (sometimes... :)):
I downgraded to 2.8.5.2-5.
I removed /var/lib/snort.
I restored the debconf settings.
I verified snort.debian.conf to be the same as it was at the last time
with 2.8.5.2-5 before.
I upgraded back to 2.8.5.2-7, and...
...everything went well: new snort.debian.conf is in place, md5sum file
is in place, md5sum matches. snort/options remains empty, and,
consequently, subsequent reinstalls of snort don't show up the -p issue
anymore.
> > No need to mention: the strange tmp-file shouldn't have been lingered
> > around :)
> Yes, I noticed this too. It is already fixed in the -7 version :)
Yes, I noticed there is no strange tmp-file anymore :)
regards
Mario
--
*axiom* welcher sensorische input bewirkte die output-aktion,
den irc-chatter mit dem nick "dus" des irc-servers
mittels eines kills zu verweisen?
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
