On Mon, 2024-06-24 at 07:11 +1000, Craig Small wrote: > On Mon, 24 Jun 2024 at 05:57, Ben Hutchings <b...@decadent.org.uk> wrote: > > Please consider dropping /usr/lib/sysctl.d/99-protect-links.conf and > > adding linux-sysctl-defaults to Depends or Recommends instead, once > > that package is available in testing. > Hi Ben, > This sounds like a great idea, config stuff for > systemd-sysctl/sysctl doesn't belong in either package. > (with the added bonus of no more Can I have my favourite kernel > tweak bugs for me) > > To actually do this, is it a matter of just not shipping that file and > removing the maintscript of: > rm_conffile /etc/sysctl.d/protect-links.conf 2:3.3.16-4~ procps
Since the version specified there is older than stable, this can be
dropped.
> mv_conffile /usr/lib/sysctl.d/protect-links.conf
> /usr/lib/sysctl.d/99-protect-links.conf 2:3.3.17-6~ procps
I don't think this line ever made sense. Nothing under /usr/lib should
be a conffile and it doesn't seem like either of
/usr/lib/sysctl.d/{,99-}protect-links.conf was marked as a conffile.
So this can also be dropped.
> Also procps ships an old /etc/sysctl.d/README.sysctl should that also
> be deleted or moved into this new package?
I would rather that stayed in procps.
Ben.
--
Ben Hutchings
You can't have everything. Where would you put it?
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
