On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 05:15:09PM +0200, Holger Levsen wrote:
> On Freitag, 29. April 2011, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
> > Regardless, policy states the following in section 6.8:
> > 5. The conffiles and any backup files (~-files, #*# files, %-files,
> > .dpkg-{old,new,tmp}, etc.) are removed.
> > Please note that /etc/sasldb2 is not a conffile. So, not removing it
> > should not be considered a policy violation.
> Hm, right, at least on a quick search for config files I cannot find anything
> in policy how config files should be treated, I can merely guess from the ucf
> description that they exist...
10.7.3: If the existence of a [configuration] file is required for the
package to be sensibly configured it is the responsibility of the package
maintainer to provide maintainer scripts which correctly create, update and
maintain the file and remove it on purge.
So I don't think anything is actually missing in Policy?
(If one wishes to argue that /etc/sasldb2 is not a configuration file, then
it's also a policy violation for it to be under /etc.)
--
Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world.
Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/
slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-policy-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110430083758.gb1...@virgil.dodds.net
