On 24.07.2013 22:47, Stefan Fritsch wrote: >> The bug in apache2 is that we still treat this situation as an >> upgrade in the postinst even if there is nothing left of the old >> install. If we can detect it, we should probably treat it as a new >> install instead.
I do not think we could in a deterministic way. We might be able to guess based on certain heuristics, like no conffiles whatsoever but the apache packages being installed. However, I am sure this will bite others who deliberately rm'ed all of /etc/apache2 because they think our configuration sucks anyway. > > We could also add a check to apache2.2-common's prerm to detect the > purging during an upgrade and abort, and get that change into wheezy > in a point release. However, only people who have upgraded to the > latest version will benefit from that change. And I am not sure that > this is a good approach in any case. Not sure about the goodness of that approach either, but that's certainly possible. I am not sure how you would like to detect this situation though? Alternatively we could enforce the modules being installed regardless of it being an upgrade or not (though this might be a debatable choice in view of policy correctness) or get apt[itude] maintainers to display a warning when using --purge-unused during a dist-upgrade. -- with kind regards, Arno Töll IRC: daemonkeeper on Freenode/OFTC GnuPG Key-ID: 0x9D80F36D
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
