On 2014-07-23 01:19:01 +0200, Christian Hofstaedtler wrote: > * Arno Töll <a...@debian.org> [140722 22:10]: > > On 21.07.2014 20:58, Vincent Lefevre wrote: > > > Yes, and a consequence of this loss is that dpkg fails. > > > > dpkg does not at all fail. If anything dpkg errors out because Apache's > > maintainer script failed, because "invoke.rc-d apache2 restart" failed, > > because ... you guess it, somebody removed the .load symlinks we expect > > to be there. > > As a mere bystander I still don't really understand the underlying > issue. You're basically saying that /some/ conffiles are kept, and > others are purged and reinstalled?
The issue is that they are purged, but *not* reinstalled. > Possible radical solution: abandon old apache binary package names > [of those that ship conffiles], introduce a new set of names, > Conflict/Break (but not Replace?) the old ones and have all modules > depend on the new packages. > 3rdparty module packages will then prevent upgrades or get > deinstalled, and users get a fresh config that works, but may not do > anything useful. The issue is not with 3rd-party module packages (specifically), but with the standard modules. And without these standard modules, Apache cannot be started. -- Vincent Lefèvre <vinc...@vinc17.net> - Web: <https://www.vinc17.net/> 100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <https://www.vinc17.net/blog/> Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / AriC project (LIP, ENS-Lyon) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140722232912.gc3...@xvii.vinc17.org
