On Wed, Oct 16, 2024 at 19:03:27 +0200, Hans wrote: > But I wondered, why this file is not modified during my updates. As people > told, /etc/profile is > part of the package base-files and is copied from > /usr/share/base-files/profile.
It's not actually part of the base-files package. It's not part of *any* package. hobbit:~$ dpkg -S /etc/profile dpkg-query: no path found matching pattern /etc/profile You can also come at it from the other direction: run "dpkg -L base-files" to see the files that are part of the base-files package. You will not see /etc/profile in the output. You'll only see /etc/profile.d which is a directory. > Examination of the files showed, there is a differnce between /etc/profiles > and /usr/share/base- > files/profile. The /var/lib/dpkg/info/base-files.postinst script contains code that will modify /etc/profile if the first argument is "configure" and the second argument isn't the empty string. I don't know what would cause those particular arguments to be passed to that script. In order for that modification to happen, the existing file's MD5 checksum is compared against the one found in /usr/share/base-files/. So... either your /etc/profile doesn't have the right MD5 checksum, or else nothing is calling that postinst script with the correct arguments. > Can someone tell me, why not? And related to this question: Does this > behaviour effect other > files, too, like bashrc bashrc_aliases and similar? /etc/skel/.bashrc *is* part of a package: hobbit:~$ dpkg -S /etc/skel/.bashrc bash: /etc/skel/.bashrc So, that file will be updated normally during bash package upgrades. Of course, that file is only used when new user accounts are created. Any existing accounts will not have their ~/.bashrc files modified. There isn't a "bashrc_aliases" file in Debian. That's something unique to your setup.
