Hi Manoj, Recently I created an RC bug (the bug, not the report) with an NMU of dbconfig-common. The package dbconfig-common uses ucf to handle updates of the content of configuration files. To prevent the need to implement logic in dbconfig-common to preserve local changes in permissions and ownership I thought I could just let ucf handle the situation, but I am quite surprised to now see the following in the manual: "As far as possible, ucf attempts to preserve the ownership and permission of the New file as it is copied to the new location." Can you please explain the logic of why ucf does that instead of maintaining the ownership and permissions of the original file? Because that means that every package that uses ucf has to make sure itself that the ownership and permissions are first copied from the old file to the new file, or else it would be violating Policy 10.7.3, the exact reason why ucf exists.
Paul PS: I don't believe the current understanding in bug 767248 is correct, I think it is ucf that is doing the copying of the ownership/permissions, so I think actually the bug should be reassigned to it.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
