Frédéric Brière <fbri...@fbriere.net> writes: > My concern is that this would introduce a discrepancy between the two > cases; why is it OK to move a modified conffile if it's been dropped out > of the package today, but not if it's been dropped two years ago? (Not > to mention that dpkg will probably confuse the latter for the former.)
If it's been modified, I actually wouldn't do it for that case either. So I guess I'm arguing that even the previous behavior was not what I would have done. > I also worry a bit about old crappy rules which could match too much; > although logcheck probably should not be relied upon for security, it > seems wrong to silently leave them behind. Hm, yes, although that's also somewhat combining two different issues. Generally the best way of fixing bad rules like that is to ship a newer version of the configuration file that cleans out the bad rules. So this would apply to cases where there were both bad rules *and* the configuration file for that application was dropped, which I would expect to be less common. Or are there a lot of existing cases where we know that the dropped configuration files contained bad rules? > In an ideal world, I guess we should ask the user. The wiki can afford > to sidestep the issue, because removing a conffile usually means it is > obsolete and would no longer be read anyway. However, that's not the > case here, and moving the conffiles does have an impact. :( Yeah, exactly. -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
