Public bug reported:
Hi,
this is more a request how to "correctly do it" instead of a bug.
I asked on IRC but got no reply yet, so to not forget I better file a bug.
I have a package (libvirt) which used to explicitly package the local apparmor
include files.
So the package had files like:
/etc/apparmor.d/local/usr.sbin.libvirtd
These files were carried in the package itself and considered conffiles.
These days that isn't needed anymore, thanks to dh_apparmor generating such
local includes.
Aligning with Debian we dropped the explicit files and use the generated ones.
All fine so far, but I wonder how to correctly "transition" that.
A) If I do rm_conffile
A1) the user had no changes, old file gets removed, new one generated all is
good
A2) the user had changes, old file gets retained in backup, new one generated
lacks the old content
B) if I not have a rm_conffile
B1) the user had no changes, the old file stays (and works) but is considered
obsolete by "dpkg --status"
B2) the user had changes, the old file stays (and works) but is considered
obsolete by "dpkg --status"
So far I think I'll go with B, as dropping user changes - especially
thos explicitly added to likely fix/avoid something - would be bad. But
I don't like having obsolete files forever.
Is there a C) which would be able to retain old changes if there were
any, but in any case make sure it is dropped from the package to no more
be considered an obsolete conffile?
** Affects: apparmor (Ubuntu)
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1703763
Title:
How to correctly transition from packaged to dh_apparmor generated
local includes
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/apparmor/+bug/1703763/+subscriptions
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
